influences of new employee development practices on temporary employee work-related attitudes

A R T I C L E S

Influences of New EmployeeDevelopment Practiceson Temporary EmployeeWork-Related Attitudes

Jeffrey P. Slattery, T. T. Selvarajan, John E. Anderson

The need to make organizations more flexible and thus more responsive toenvironmental change has led to many organizations using a flexible workforcethat includes temporary employees. The article’s purpose was to examinerelationships between new employee development (NED) practices thatpromote organizational socialization and temporary employee attitudes (i.e.,job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention). Wedeveloped and empirically tested two models depicting the influence of the dualnature of NED practices on employee attitudes in a temporary agencyemploying workers at many U.S. sites. Results supported nearly all hypoth-esized relationships. Concerning the client organization, we found positiverelationships between NED practices and job satisfaction and organizationalcommitment and a negative relationship between NED practices and turnoverintention. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment partially mediatedthe NED practices and turnover intention relationship. Similar results werefound for relationships between NED practices and employee attitudes inrelation to the temporary agency. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Organizational socialization has been identified as an important facet of orga-nizational functioning (Fogarty & Dirsmith, 2001). The role of humanresource development (HRD) is particularly important when employees enteran organization (Holton, 1996) because it is through HRD practices that newemployees can be initially socialized by being introduced to the organization’svalues, norms, and culture. Although there is evidence to support just howimportant new employee development (NED) practices are to an organization

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 17, no. 3, Fall 2006 © Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.1175 279

280 Slattery, Selvarajan, Anderson

(e.g., Holton, 1995, 1996), to date, there have been few investigations explor-ing whether it is just as important for the new type of worker employed inmany of today’s organizations: the temporary worker.

The lack of investigation is surprising for several reasons. The first is thatthe temporary worker is becoming more of an integral part of the workforce.According to a National Bureau of Economic Research report, the use of tem-porary workers grew at a rate of 11% during the 1990s and is expected to con-tinue increasing through the next decade (Estavo & Latch, 1999). The increasehas been occurring in the use of temporary employees not only in the tradi-tional areas of temporary employment (e.g., construction, personnel supplyservices, etc.) but also in new economy industries that employ highly skilledknowledge workers (Neumark & Reed, 2002). Second, businesses are increas-ingly facing changes in the environment; thus, embracing change is becomingan important strategic necessity for survival. Madsen, Miller, and John (2005)identified how important employees’ social relationships and organizationalcommitment are in preparing organizations for change. Again, NED practicesplay a key role in the organizational socialization process and thus enable orga-nizations to facilitate any change process.

Numerous studies have investigated relationships between employeedevelopment, such as training and organizational development practices thatmay influence organizational socialization, and ultimately employee attitudesand organizational performance (see Jacobs & Washington, 2003, for areview), but these studies have used permanent and full-time employees astheir participants. To date, investigations involving temporary workers thathave been performed have mainly focused on the difference between employ-ees’ attitudes of full-time and part-time workers within an organization(Thorsteinson, 2003).

Another area of inquiry that has received scant attention is the dual natureof employee attitudes that may exist for temporary employees. Temporaryemployees face a unique situation in that they identify with two organizations:the client organization where they are assigned to work and the temporaryagency organization that is their nominal employer. Thus, any study investi-gating relationships as they pertain to temporary employees must examine therelationships as they relate to both the client organization (where the work isactually performed) and the temporary agency (their employer) (Moorman &Harland, 2002).

Development of the Models

The purpose of this exploratory study is twofold. First, this study seeks to exam-ine whether previously found relationships (using permanent employees as par-ticipants) between NED practices that help promote organizational socializationand work-related attitudes would be replicated for temporary employees. Inaddition, this study seeks to investigate whether these relationships exist for the

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq

Influences of New Employee Development Practices 281


temporary employees’ work-related attitudes in relation to not only the com-panies in which they are performing the work but also the temporary agenciesthat employ the temporary employees. Specifically, this study examines therelationship between NED practices and the work-related attitudes of job sat-isfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention at both the clientorganization and the temporary agency.

Research in both the human resource and HRD areas have found thatpractices related to human resource and HRD have had significant influenceson employee work-related attitudes. Research has found that human resourcepractices such as recruitment and selection, compensation and reward systems,assessment, and training influence numerous employee work-related attitudes(e.g., Robertson & Mindel, 1980; Ogilvie, 1986; Park, Mitsuhashi, Fey, &Bjorkman, 2003; Meyer & Smith, 2000). One study even found that percep-tions of human resource practices were more important than the actual prac-tices with regard to its influence on employee commitment (Kinicki, Carson, &Bohlander, 1992).

One way that HRD practices influence work-related attitudes is throughthe development of an employee’s organizational socialization. Findings fromstudies investigating employee organizational socialization developed usinghuman resource practices, which include HRD practices, suggest that it canhave an influence on employee work-related attitudes such as organizationalcommitment, job satisfaction, and turnover intention (Ashforth & Mael, 1989;Foote, 2004; Koene & van Riemsdijk, 2005). Ashforth and Mael argued thatorganizational socialization provides a mechanism where individuals reifythe organization and feel loyal and committed to it. Because individuals in orga-nizations have multiple identities and because identification can shapeorganizational commitment, Ashforth and Mael suggested that research shouldfocus on multiple identities and their influence on multiple commitments.

In the context of temporary employees, this means that NED practices thatlead to organizational socialization adopted by the client organization and tem-porary agency have an influence on employee attitudes toward the two respec-tive organizations. In addition to social identity theory, the theoretical rationalefor the duality in attitudes temporary employees may exhibit is based on socialexchange theory that is rooted in the norm of reciprocity (Blau, 1964). Thus,temporary employees may reciprocate the support they received from thesetwo organizations during the socialization process developed through HRDpractices by showing favorable attitudes toward both the temporary agencyand the client organization.

Using the literature reviewed in the next section, two models depicting thehypothesized relationships between NED practices and temporary employees’worker-related attitudes were developed. The models are shown in Figures 1and 2. These models indicate that NED practices are related to job satisfaction,organizational commitment, and turnover intention for both the temporaryagency and client organization.



OrganizationalCommitment-

Client

Job Satisfaction-Client

New EmployeeDevelopment

Practices-Client

H1a (+) H5a (–)

H3a (–)

H2a (+) H4a (–)

TurnoverIntentions-

Client

OrganizationalCommitment-Temp Agency

Job Satisfaction-Temp Agency

New EmployeeDevelopment

Practices-Temp Agency

H1b (+) H5b (–)

H3b (–)

H2b (+) H4b (–)

TurnoverIntentions-

Temp Agency

Figure 1. Model for Temporary Employee Attitudes Towardthe Client Organization

Figure 2. Model for Temporary Employee Attitude Towardthe Temp Agency

Note: H1b, H2b, and so forth refer to hypotheses stated in the text; (�) indicates a positiverelationship, and (�) indicates a negative relationship.

Note: H1a, H2a, and so forth refer to hypotheses stated in the text; (�) indicates a positiverelationship, and (�) indicates a negative relationship.



For this study, organizational commitment is defined as the extent towhich an individual feels loyal to the organization (Price, 1977). Job satisfac-tion is defined as positive emotions an employee has toward his or her job(Locke, 1976), and employee turnover intention is defined as one’s propensityto leave (Lyons, 1971).

New Employee Development Practices and Organizational Commit-ment. Several investigations have found that several aspects of training arerelated to employee organizational commitment. In a study of nurses in NewZealand and the United States, perceived benefits of training, perceived accessto training, supervisory support for training, and motivation to learn fromtraining were positively related to the affective and normative components oforganizational commitment (Bartlett & Kang, 2004). Bartlett (2001) reportedthat the relationship between perceived access to training and organizationalcommitment was moderated by job satisfaction.

New employee development practices may influence organizational social-ization and its subsequent relationship with organizational commitment (Allen& Meyer, 1990; Ashforth & Saks, 1996). These research studies found thatorganizational socialization influenced employee commitment. In a longitudi-nal study of 135 graduate students, Mabey (1986) found that postentry expe-riences in terms of early organizational socialization practices predictedorganizational commitment of employees. These results lead to the followinghypothesized relationships found within our proposed models:

HYPOTHESIS 1a (H1a): New employee development practices at the client organi-zation will be positively related to organizational commitment toward the clientorganization.

HYPOTHESIS 1b (H1b): New employee development practices at the agency organiza-tion will be positively related to organizational commitment toward the temp agency.

New Employee Development Practices and Job Satisfaction. In a studyof employment practices of workers in the hospitality sector in Australia,Lowry, Simon, and Kimberley (2002) found that work context factors, includ-ing perceived adequacy of training, had an influence on job satisfaction. In astudy of small to medium-sized firms in Malaysia, various aspects of workplacelearning (incidental, informal, and formal) were found to be related toemployee satisfaction (Rowden & Ahmad, 2000). Feldman, Doerpinghaus,and Turnley’s (1994) case study on temporary employment suggests that tem-porary employees are dissatisfied when they are not provided with informa-tion about their assignments. Given the previous findings, the followinghypotheses relate to an employee’s NED practices and job satisfaction.

HYPOTHESIS 2a (H2a): New employee development practices at the client organi-zation will be positively related to job satisfaction toward the client organization.



HYPOTHESIS 2b (H2b): New employee development practices at the temp agencywill be positively related to job satisfaction toward the temp agency.

New Employee Development Practices and Turnover Intention. In a con-ceptual model for labor turnover, Winterton (2004) acknowledges the impor-tance of HRD activities in relation to turnover. Peterson (2004) also developeda theoretical model of turnover from an HRD perspective. Consistent withthese models, NED practices are negatively related to turnover. In our models,the following hypotheses are given:

HYPOTHESIS 3a (H3a): New employee development practices at the client organiza-tion will be negatively related to turnover intention toward the client organization.

Hypothesis 3b (H3b): New employee development practices at the temp agencywill be negatively related to turnover intention toward the temp agency.

Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Inten-tion. There has been a plethora of investigations exploring the relationshipsbetween job satisfaction and organizational commitment as antecedents toemployee turnover intention. Research on employee turnover suggests that atti-tudes such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment can be antecedentsto withdrawal cognitions such as turnover intentions (e.g., Hom & Griffeth, 1995;Allen, 2004; Currivan, 1999; Griffeth, Hom, & Gaertner, 2000). To coincide to thepreviously identified findings, the following hypotheses are given:

HYPOTHESIS 4a (H4a): Job satisfaction with the client organization will be negativelyrelated to turnover intention toward the client organization.

HYPOTHESIS 4b (H4b): Job satisfaction with the temp agency will be negativelyrelated to turnover intention toward the temp agency.

HYPOTHESIS 5a (H5a): Organizational commitment toward the client organizationwill be negatively related to turnover intention toward the client organization.

HYPOTHESIS 5b (H5b): Organizational commitment toward the temp agency willbe negatively related to turnover intention toward the temp agency.

Mediating Effects of Organization Commitment and Job Satisfaction. Themodels also suggest that attitudes such as organizational commitment and satis-faction may mediate the relationship between socialization practices such as NEDpractices and turnover intention. Research on employee turnover suggests thatattitudes such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment can beantecedents to withdrawal cognitions such as turnover intentions (e.g., Hom &Kinicki, 2001; Hom, Griffeth, Palich, & Bracker, 1999; Allen, 2004; Currivan,1999; Griffeth, Hom, & Gaertner, 2000). In the two models proposed for thisstudy, job satisfaction and organizational commitment are depicted as antecedents



to turnover intention and are hypothesized to act as mediators in the relationshipbetween NED practices and turnover intention. Thus, the following hypothesesare given:

HYPOTHESIS 6a (H6a): Job satisfaction toward the client organization will mediatethe relationship between new development practices at the client organization andintention to quit the client organization.

HYPOTHESIS 6b (H6b): Job satisfaction toward the temp agency will mediate therelationship between new development practices used by the temp agency andintention to quit the temp agency.

HYPOTHESIS 7a (H7a): Organizational commitment toward the client organizationwill mediate the relationship between new development practices used by the clientorganization and intention to quit the client organization.

HYPOTHESIS 7b (H7b): Organizational commitment toward the temp agency willmediate the relationship between new development practices used by the tempagency and intention to quit the temp agency.

Methods

Sample and Sample Characteristics. Participants were temporary asso-ciates employed at a nationally franchised temporary service organization. Thetemp agency employed workers in several industries, including manufactur-ing, financial services, technology, and education. These workers mainlyworked in the industrial, technical, and clerical professions.

Over 15,000 surveys were delivered to all franchised temp agency locationsin the United States. A response rate of 8.6% was obtained, with 0.2% of thesurveys being unusable. Although this response rate seems low, surveys usingtemporary employees seem to have low response rates (van Hooft, Bon, Taris, &van der Flier, 2004; Lowry et al., 2002; Recruitment and Employment Con-federation, 2002). The main reason for this low response rate may be that theemployees were distributed across various locations (client sites) all overthe United States, and the employees completed the surveys on their own time.Typically, higher response rates are obtained when surveying employees in a fewclient organizations because it is easy to follow up to get a better response rate.

To check for any nonresponse bias, we compared the demographic char-acteristics of respondents with those of the population in terms of age, gender,education, and marital status. We found that the demographic characteristicsof the respondents were similar to that of the entire population of the tempagency surveyed. In addition, the demographic characteristics of this sample arealso similar to those of temporary employees in another study of temp agen-cies in the United States (Feldman et al., 1994). Feldman and his colleaguessurveyed 200 temporary agencies in the United States, and the demographiccharacteristics of temporary employees in their study in terms of age, gender,



marital status, and education were similar to those of the sample from the cur-rent study. Thus, this study’s sample appears to be representative of temporaryemployees in the United States.

Participants included 472 men, 769 women, and 16 people who did notrespond to the gender question. Approximately 40% of the respondents weremarried. The percentage of participants who fell into the different categoriesfor age included 13% in the 16-to-21 age group, 22% in the 22-to-27 agegroup, 17% in the 28-to-33 age group, 15% in the 34-to-39 age group, 19%in the 40-to-50 age group, 9% in the 51-to-60 age group, and 5% in the over-60 age group. Over 57% of the respondents had continued with their educa-tion after graduating from high school.

Data Collection. Before the study began, the survey and its cover letterwere developed and later approved by the human experimentation advisorycouncil that serves as the institutional review board at the university of one ofthe authors. In the cover letter, participants were informed that the primaryresearcher would maintain strict confidentiality and that no one at the tempagency or organization where they worked would ever know their names. Par-ticipants were told in the cover letter to mail the completed survey to the pri-mary researcher using the self-addressed, prepaid postage envelope. Becausecompleted surveys were to be mailed directly to the primary researcher, no sur-veys were collected at any temp agency site or any organization employing theparticipants. After all the data were collected, only summary information wasprovided to the national franchise office of the participating temporary agency,and due care was taken to keep any completed surveys mailed to the primaryresearcher as secure as possible. Only the primary researcher has handled thecompleted surveys so that researcher bias has been minimized.

A week before the surveys were distributed, a letter from the national fran-chise office was delivered to each franchise location asking the franchisees tohelp in distributing the surveys. One week later, a certain percentage of sur-veys were distributed to all locations. A letter from the national franchise officeexplained how the surveys were to be distributed. The procedure to distributethe surveys included asking the person responsible for distributing the tempservice’s local payroll checks to distribute the surveys when the temporaryassociates picked up their paychecks. Surveys were distributed by having thepaymaster at each location give the surveys to the temporary associates whenthey picked up their payroll checks.

Construct Measurement

Job Satisfaction. Temporary employee job satisfaction with the clientcompany and job satisfaction with the temp agency were assessed using20 items. These items included 17 items from the Job Diagnostic Survey andfrom these items; another 3 items were created by modifying items thatrelated to activities pertinent to the temp agency. Anchor points on 5-point



Likert item scales ranged from 5 (complete satisfaction) to 1 (completedissatisfaction).

Because pay was the responsibility of the temp agency, the scores of two itemsrelated to pay and the three JDS items that were modified were summed to cre-ate the job satisfaction with the temporary agency. Cronbach’s reliability coeffi-cient was 0.90. The remaining 15 items were summed to create a general jobsatisfaction score for how satisfied the temporary employees were with the clientorganization for which they worked. Cronbach’s reliability coefficient was 0.95.

Organizational Commitment. Organizational commitment was measuredusing the modified Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Mowday,Steers, & Porter, 1979) that excluded items related to intent to quit. Clientorganizational commitment was measured by modifying the items to indicatecommitment to the client organization, and temp agency commitment wasmeasured by modifying the items to indicate commitment to temp agency. TheCronbach reliabilities for these two scales were 0.92 and 0.90, respectively.

Turnover Intention (Propensity to Leave). A surrogate variable foremployee turnover is one’s propensity to leave. This criterion variable has oftenbeen used in the literature (Hom & Griffeth, 1995; Mowday, Koberg, &McArthur, 1984). Propensity to leave the temporary agency was assessed usinga three-item instrument (Lyons, 1971). Participants were asked to rate theirchances they would quit as a temporary associate within the next threemonths, six months, and two years. Anchor points on 5-point Likert itemscales ranged from 5 (very high chance) to 1 (no chance at all). Cronbach’sreliability coefficient was 0.84.

Propensity to leave the client organization was assessed using two items.Participants were asked what the chance was that he or she would quit theassignment (at the client company) either tomorrow and as soon as they can.This criterion variable has often been used in the literature (Hom & Griffeth,1995; Mowday et al. 1984).

New Employee Development Practices. We developed a scale to measureNED practices because existing scales were not suitable for measuring newdevelopment practices for temporary employees. After studying NED practicesfor temporary employees in both the temp agency and the client organization,we developed a 17-item questionnaire for measuring NED practices for tem-porary employees. The items used to measure NED practices are shown inTable 1. These items were measured using the following scale: 0 � no,1 � yes, and 2 � I do not know.

A factor analysis was conducted, and the results are also shown in Table 1.The first factor is the “NED practices-Temp Agency,” and the second factor is the“NED practices-Client.” We dropped the items that were not loading oneither of the dimensions and those items that loaded high on both dimen-sions from further analysis. The Kuder-Richardson 20 reliabilities for theNED measures for the temp agency and the client organization were 0.92and 0.86, respectively.



Table 1. Factor Analysis: New Employee Development (NED)Practices Measures

Item Names NED Practices-Items Factor 1 Factor 2

tatour

talong

tadress

tahourstacowrktasuprtaproc

taperfev

tatrain

taovertm

tagoals

taequip

tasafety

tapolicy

taspacetaprobs

taconds

ctourclong

cdress

choursccowrkcsuprcproc

cperfev

ctrain

covertm

NED Practices-Temp Agency1. Provide you with a tour of the client

company?2. Tell you how long you would be working at

the client company?3. Tell you what the dress code was at the client

company?4. Tell you what hours you would be needed?5. Introduce you to your coworker(s)?6. Introduce you to other supervisor(s)?7. Tell you what the client company’s work

procedures were?8. Tell you how your performance would be

evaluated?9. Provide you with training on equipment that

you would use?10. Tell you whether overtime assignments may

be needed?11. Communicate to you what objectives or goals

were set for you?12. Provide the necessary equipment for you to

do your assignment?13. Show you the location of any emergency or

safety equipment?14. Describe any personnel policies that may

apply to you?15. Prepare a work space for you?16. Assign a person to help you with any

problems?17. Give you the conditions of your assignment?

NED Practices-Client1. Provide you with a tour of the client company?2. Tell you how long you would be working at

the client company?3. Tell you what the dress code was at the client

company?4. Tell you what hours you would be needed?5. Introduce you to your coworker(s)?6. Introduce you to other supervisor(s)?7. Tell you what the client company’s work

procedures were?8. Tell you how your performance would be

evaluated?9. Provide you with training on equipment that

you would use?10. Tell you whether overtime assignments may

be needed?

0.70

0.20

0.30

0.220.730.730.58

0.65

0.73

0.60

0.60

0.76

0.76

0.56

0.760.58

0.45

0.070.13

0.12

�0.01�0.02

0.070.09

0.40

0.15

0.30

0.09

0.25

0.18

0.060.070.020.22

0.22

�0.01

0.18

0.28

�0.03

0.07

0.24

0.040.14

0.34

0.610.51

0.54

0.530.600.590.61

0.43

0.43

0.46



Table 1. (Continued)

Item Names NED Practices-Items Factor 1 Factor 2

Control Variables. Control variables considered for this study are age,gender, education level, experience at the client site in number of days, andwhether or not the employee is looking for a full-time job. Educational levelwas measured on a scale ranging from “some high school” to “postgraduatedegree.” We measured whether or not the employee is looking for a job by thedichotomous variable “yes” or “no.”

Results

Descriptive Statistics. The means, standard deviations, and correlations forthe variables are presented in Table 2.

Regression Analysis-Hypothesis Testing. Regression analysis was used forhypotheses testing, and the results of regression are shown in Tables 3, 4, and5. The control variables were regressed in the first step, and then the inde-pendent or mediating variables were regressed.

The results from Table 3 revealed that H1a, which predicted that NEDpractices at the client organization will be positively related to organizationalcommitment toward the client organization, was supported (� � 0.43,p � .01). H1b, which posited that NED practices at the temp agency will bepositively related to organizational commitment toward the temp agency wasalso supported (� � 0.41, p � .01).

H2a, which stated that NED practices at the client organization will bepositively related to job satisfaction toward the client organization, wassupported (� � 0.51, p � .01). As the results in Table 3 indicate, NEDpractices at the temp agency were positively related to job satisfaction with thetemp agency (� � 0.38, p � .01); thus, H2b was also supported.

H3a and H3b relate to the relationship between NED practices and turnoverintention toward client organization and temp agency, respectively. As the resultsfrom Table 4 indicate, NED practices at the client organization were negatively

cgoals

cequip

csafety

cpolicy

cspacecprobs

cconds

11. Communicate to you what objectives or goalswere set for you?

12. Provide the necessary equipment for you todo your assignment?

13. Show you the location of any emergency orsafety equipment?

14. Describe any personnel policies that mayapply to you?

15. Prepare a work space for you?16. Assign a person to help you with any

problems?17. Give you the conditions of your assignment?

0.18

�0.01

0.28

0.19

0.080.10

0.19

0.61

0.43

0.51

0.64

0.480.51

0.64

Tab

le 2

.M

ean

s, S

tan

dar

d D

evia

tion

s, a

nd

Cor

rela

tion

s A

mon

g V

aria

bles

Vari

able

Nam

e (N

, mea

n, S

D)

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1G

ende

r1,

00(1

,261

, 0.6

, 0.4

9)

2A

ge�

0.06

*1.

00(1

,256

, 3.4

7, 1

.71)

3E

duca

tion

0.08

**0.

13**

1.00

(1,2

57, 3

.80,

1.4

9)

4E

xper

ienc

e at

the

�0.

050.

19**

0.05

1.00

clie

nt o

rgan

izat

ion

(1,2

45, 1

39.2

8, 2

41.6

9)

5Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-�

0.01

�0.

09**

�0.

08**

�0.

13**

1.00

tim

e em

ploy

men

t(1

,257

, 0.7

1, 0

.45)

6N

ED

pra

ctic

es-t

emp

agen

cy�

0.08

**�

0.05

*�

0.13

**0.

04�

0.03

1.00

(1,2

28, 0

.32,

0.3

)

7N

ED

pra

ctic

es-c

lient

�

0.08

**�

0.06

*�

0.01

0�

0.05

0.32

**1.

00(1

,171

, 0.7

, 0.3

)

8Jo

b sa

tisf

acti

on-c

lient

0.11

**0.

02�

0.09

**0.

04�

0.08

**0.

25**

0.51

**1.

00(1

,261

, 3.9

6, 0

.78)

9Jo

b sa

tisf

acti

on-t

emp

agen

cy0.

03�

0.02

�0.

16**

�0.

02�

0.11

**0.

39**

0.39

**0.

69**

1.00

(1,2

58, 3

.56,

0.8

7)

10O

rgan

izat

iona

l 0.

09**

�0.

01�

0.14

**0.

02�

0.05

0.26

**0.

43**

0.73

**0.

52**

1.00

com

mit

men

t-cl

ient

(1,2

60, 3

.76,

0.7

5)

11O

rgan

izat

iona

l com

mit

men

t-0.

050.

02�

0.17

**�

0.04

�0.

040.

38**

0.27

**0.

49**

0.67

**0.

54**

1.00

tem

p ag

ency

(1

,260

, 3.7

1, 0

.79)

12Tu

rnov

er in

tent

ion-

clie

nt�

0.11

**0

0.04

�0.

010.

10**

�0.

08**

�0.

35**

�0.

47**

�0.

33**

�0.

48**

�0.

33**

1.00

(1,2

60, 1

.70,

0.9

5)

13Tu

rnov

er in

tent

ion-

tem

p �

0.01

�0.

020.

19**

�0.

09**

0.11

**�

0.24

**�

0.14

**�

0.25

**�

0.33

**�

0.29

**�

0.41

**0.

38**

agen

cy(1

,250

, 3.0

1, 1

.32)

Not

e:C

orre

lati

on v

alue

s ar

e ro

unde

d to

tw

o de

cim

al p

lace

s. *

p�

.05.

**p

�.0

1.



Table 3. Regression Analysis Results

Control and Job Job Organizational OrganizationalIndependent Satisfaction- Satisfaction- Commitment- Commitment-Variables Client Temp Agency Client Temp Agency

Beta Values-Dependent VariablesControl variables

Age 0.05* 0.03* 0.02 0.08**Gender 0.08* 0.06* 0.08* 0.09**Education �0.10* �0.11** �0.15** �0.14**Experience at 0.03 �0.03 0.02 �0.05*

client organizationLooking for �0.04 �0.11** �0.02 �0.03

full-time jobR2 change 0.03** 0.04** 0.03** 0.04**

Independent variablesNED practices-client 0.51** — 0.43** —R2 change 0.27** — 0.19** —NED practices- — 0.38** — 0.41**

temp agencyR2 change — 0.14** — 0.14**

*p � .05. **p � .01.

related to intention to quit the client organization (� � �0.34, p � .01), andNED practices at the temp agency were negatively related to intention to quit thetemp agency (� � �0.21, p � .01). Thus, both these hypotheses were supported.

Table 4 shows the results for the hypotheses 4a and 4b. The results revealedthat H4a, job satisfaction for the client organization will be negatively related toturnover intentions for the client organization (� � �0.47, p � .01), was sup-ported. H4b, which stated that job satisfaction for the temp agency would be neg-atively related to turnover intentions for the temp agency (� � �0.30, p � .01),was also supported.

H5a and H5b relate to the relationship between organizational commit-ment and turnover intention. As the results from Table 5 indicate, organiza-tional commitment at the client organization was negatively related to intentionto quit the client organization (� � �0.47, p � .01), and organizational com-mitment at the temp agency was negatively related to intention to quit thetemp agency (� � �0.39, p � .01). Thus, both H5a and H5b were supported.

Regression Analysis: Mediation Testing. H6a and H6b address the medi-ating role of job satisfaction on the relationship between NED practices andturnover intention toward client organization and temp agency, respectively.H7a and H7b relate to the mediating role of organizational commitment on therelationship between NED practices and turnover intention toward clientorganization and temp agency, respectively.

Tab

le 4

.R

egre

ssio

n A

nal

ysis

for

Med

iati

onal

Eff

ects

: Mod

els

1 an

d 2

Mod

el 1

: Dep

ende

nt V

aria

ble:

Mod

el 2

: Dep

ende

nt V

aria

ble:

Turn

over

Inte

ntio

n-C

lient

Tu

rnov

er In

tent

ion-

Tem

p A

genc

y

Inde

pend

ent a

nd C

ontr

ol V

aria

bles

Beta

R2

Cha

nge

Inde

pend

ent a

nd C

ontr

ol V

aria

bles

Beta

R2

Cha

nge

Mod

el 1

AM

odel

2A

Con

trol

var

iabl

es

0.02

**C

ontr

ol v

aria

bles

0.07

**A

ge0

Age

�0.

04G

ende

r �

0.09

**G

ende

r�

0.03

Edu

cati

on0.

06*

Edu

cati

on0.

20**

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n 0

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n�

0.07

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.07

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.11

**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

11**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

05**

NE

D p

ract

ices

-clie

nt�

0.34

**N

ED

pra

ctic

es-t

emp

agen

cy�

0.21

**

Mod

el 1

BM

odel

2B

Con

trol

var

iabl

es

0.02

**C

ontr

ol v

aria

bles

0.06

**A

ge0.

01A

ge�

0.02

Gen

der

�0.

05*

Gen

der

�0.

02E

duca

tion

0.01

Edu

cati

on0.

16E

xper

ienc

e at

clie

nt o

rgan

izat

ion

0.01

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n�

0.08

**Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.07

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.08

**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

21**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

08**

Job

sati

sfac

tion

-clie

nt�

0.47

**Jo

b sa

tisf

acti

on-t

emp

agen

cy�

0.30

**

Mod

el 1

CM

odel

2C

Con

trol

var

iabl

es

0.02

**C

ontr

ol v

aria

bles

0.

07**

Age

0.02

Age

�0.

03G

ende

r�

0.05

*G

ende

r�

0.02

Edu

cati

on0.

02E

duca

tion

0.17

**E

xper

ienc

e at

clie

nt o

rgan

izat

ion

0.01

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n�

0.08

**Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.05

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.08

**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

es0.

23**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

es0.

10**

NE

D p

ract

ices

-clie

nt�

0.13

**N

ED

pra

ctic

es-t

emp

agen

cy�

0.12

**Jo

b sa

tisf

acti

on-c

lient

�0.

41**

Job

sati

sfac

tion

-tem

p ag

ency

�0.

26**

*p�

.05.

**p

�.0

1.

Tab

le 5

.Reg

ress

ion

An

alys

is f

or M

edia

tion

al E

ffec

ts: M

odel

s 3

and

4

Mod

el 3

: Dep

ende

nt V

aria

ble:

Mod

el 4

: Dep

ende

nt V

aria

ble:

Turn

over

Inte

ntio

n-C

lient

Tu

rnov

er In

tent

ion-

Tem

p A

genc

y

Inde

pend

ent a

nd C

ontr

ol V

aria

bles

Beta

R2

Cha

nge

Inde

pend

ent a

nd C

ontr

ol V

aria

bles

Beta

R2

Cha

nge

Mod

el 3

AM

odel

4A

Con

trol

var

iabl

es

0.02

**C

ontr

ol v

aria

bles

0.07

**A

ge0

Age

�0.

04G

ende

r �

0.09

**G

ende

r�

0.03

Edu

cati

on0.

06*

Edu

cati

on0.

20**

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n 0

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n�

0.07

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.07

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.11

**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

11**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

05**

NE

D p

ract

ices

-clie

nt�

0.34

**N

ED

pra

ctic

es-t

emp

agen

cy�

0.21

**

Mod

el 3

BM

odel

4B

Con

trol

var

iabl

es

0.02

*C

ontr

ol v

aria

bles

0.

06**

Age

0.01

Age

�0.

01G

ende

r�

0.05

*G

ende

r0

Edu

cati

on�

0.01

Edu

cati

on0.

14**

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n0

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n�

0.09

**Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.08

**Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.09

**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

21**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

e0.

14**

Org

aniz

atio

nal c

omm

itm

ent–

clie

nt�

0.47

**O

rgan

izat

iona

l com

mit

men

t-te

mp

agen

cy�

0.39

**

Mod

el 3

CM

odel

4C

Con

trol

var

iabl

es

0.02

**C

ontr

ol V

aria

bles

0.

07**

Age

0.01

Age

�0.

09**

Gen

der

�0.

05*

Gen

der

�0.

01E

duca

tion

0E

duca

tion

0.01

Exp

erie

nce

at c

lient

org

aniz

atio

n0.

01E

xper

ienc

e at

clie

nt o

rgan

izat

ion

0.14

**Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

0.06

*Lo

okin

g fo

r fu

ll-ti

me

job

�0.

09**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

es0.

26**

Inde

pend

ent

or m

edia

ting

var

iabl

es0.

16**

NE

D p

ract

ices

-clie

nt�

0.16

**N

ED

pra

ctic

es-t

emp

agen

cy�

0.8*

*O

rgan

izat

iona

l com

mit

men

t–cl

ient

�0.

41**

Org

aniz

atio

nal c

omm

itm

ent-

tem

p ag

ency

�0.

36**

*p�

.05.

**p

�.0

1.



We followed Baron and Kenny’s (1986) procedure for conducting themediational analysis using regression. The results of the regression analysisneeded to test whether the four conditions that must be met to establishwhether mediation exists are given in Tables 4 and 5.

As the results from Tables 3 and 4 indicate, the first two conditions ofmediation regression analysis were satisfied for H6a relating to the mediat-ing influence of job satisfaction between NED practices at the client organi-zation and intention to quit the client organization. According to the results,the mediating variable job satisfaction toward client organization was sig-nificantly related to turnover intention toward client organization, thussatisfying the third condition for the mediation. We regressed both job sat-isfaction toward the client organization and NED practices at the client orga-nization on turnover intention toward the client organization as a test forthe fourth condition of mediation. The results showed that the beta weightfor the NED practices variable was �0.13 (p � .01) which was significantbut with a reduced magnitude (compared with a beta weight of �0.34when NED practices at the client organization alone were part of the regres-sion equation). The mediating effect of job satisfaction is of the magnitude0.21 (difference between �0.34 and �0.13). These results suggest a partialmediation for H6a, which stated that job satisfaction toward the client orga-nization would partially mediate the relationship between NED pract-ices at the client organization and turnover intention toward the clientorganization.

For H6b, as the results in Tables 3 and 4 indicate, Baron and Kenny’s(1986) mediation conditions 1, 2, and 3 were satisfied. That is, the NED prac-tices variable was sufficiently related to turnover intention toward the tempagency and job satisfaction toward the temp agency; the mediating variable,job satisfaction toward temp agency, was significantly related to turnover inten-tion toward the temp agency. Regressing job satisfaction for the temp agencywith NED practices at the temp agency on turnover intention for the tempagency, we found that the beta weights for the NED practices variable were sig-nificant (�0.12, p � .01) but had a reduced magnitude (compared with�0.21 when NED practices alone were part of the regression equation). Themediating effect of job satisfaction is of the magnitude 0.09. The resultsindicate partial mediation for H6b.

Concerning the client organization, H7a stated that organizational com-mitment would mediate the relationship between NED practices and turnoverintention. The results from Tables 3 and 5 show that the first three conditionsneeded for mediation were supported. That is, NED practices at the clientorganization were related to both client organizational commitment andturnover intention toward client organization, and the mediating variable,client organizational commitment, was significantly related to intention to quitthe client organization. NED practices at the client organization were still sig-nificantly related to intention to quit the client organization (� � �0.16;


p � .01) but with a reduced magnitude of beta (compared with �0.34 whenNED practices alone were part of the regression equation). The mediating effectof organizational commitment is of a magnitude of 0.18. Thus, support wasfound for a partial mediation as hypothesized in H7a.

H7b proposed that commitment toward the temp agency would mediatethe relationship between NED practices at the temp agency and temp agencyturnover intention. Again, the results in Tables 3 and 5 indicate that conditions1, 2, and 3 for mediation were supported. NED practices-temp agency were sig-nificantly related to turnover intention-temp agency and the temp employee’sorganizational commitment for the temp agency. The mediating variable, tempagency organizational commitment, was significantly related to intention to quitthe temp agency. Partial mediation is indicated for H7b because the influenceof NED practices at the temp agency remained significant (� � �0.08; p � .01)when job satisfaction and NED practices were introduced into the regression,but the magnitude of beta weights reduced from �0.21 to �0.08. The media-tion effect of organizational commitment is of a magnitude of 0.13.

Discussion

Overall, this study found support for the two models developed to examine therelationships between NED practices and temporary employees’ work-relatedattitudes. As hypothesized, the more NED practices were used, the higher thelevels of both organizational commitment and job satisfaction and, ultimately,less turnover intention. This means that temporary employees who encounteredmore NED practices such as communication of procedures, initial on-the-jobtraining, an explanation of goals and objectives for the assignment, and the likeinfluenced temporary employee job satisfaction and organizational commitmentin positive ways that then led to less turnover intention. Clearly, as has beensupported in studies using permanent employees (e.g., Holton, 2001), the rela-tionships between NED practices and the work-related attitudes investigatedhold true for temporary employees.

These findings are important to the HRD field because many of thepractices performed in HRD have an influence on social aspects experiencedby workers in the organization, especially when entering the organization.Even though temporary employees are in essence “temporary,” they mustalso become a part of the organization because they are required to workwith permanent workers and, ultimately, pursue the same goals and objec-tives set forth by the organization. It may be that NED practices areextremely important because their use can help employees better adjust tothe organization’s environment (van Maanen, 1978) and, in today’s rapidlychanging environment, help develop a readiness for change (Madsen, et al.,2005). The results of this study indicate that NED practices may be animportant component of any organizational practices that are implementedto encourage the socialization of temporary employees because temporary




employees who are well adjusted to the organization’s environment mayhave more positive work-related attitudes and have more intention to stayin the organization. Investigating how temporary workers are socialized inan organization may in fact be just as important as, or even more importantthan, socialization attempts for permanent workers. As reported in the prac-titioner literature, temporary workers may feel alienated from the rest of theworkforce because of the temporary nature of their affiliation with the orga-nization and permanent workforce. Temporary workers who are given moreopportunities to be properly socialized through the use of NED practicesmay lead to higher levels in the three main components of organizationalcommitment as identified by Cook and Wall (1980): identification (con-nection and pride employees feel toward their organization), involvement(perceived contribution an employee makes to an organization), and loyalty(whether one will leave the organization).

Although a few empirical investigations (e.g., Moorman & Harland, 2002)have looked at the dual nature of attitudes temporary employees may havetoward the different organizations for which they work and in which they work,this study is the only one that has specifically investigated HRD-related issuesusing the dual nature of the temporary employee’s perspective. These findingsenhance the HRD literature because the results clearly demonstrate that the influ-ence of NED practices is present when considering the dual nature of the tem-porary employee. This study, in line with previous studies, provides support forthe social identity perspective that employees may identify with more than oneorganization or social group (Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail, 1994). NEDpractices at both the temp agency and the client organization were positivelyrelated to job satisfaction and organizational commitment and negatively relatedto turnover intention toward each of the respective organizations. NED practicesat these two organizations further reinforce the identification with these two orga-nizations due to the internalization of values engendered in a socializationprocess. Again, NED practices may influence the socialization process at boththe client organization and temp agency and, thus, ultimately influence the dual-ity of employee attitudes toward these two organizations.

In addition, social exchange theory provides a framework for examiningwhy temporary employees may exhibit these dual attitudes (Liden, Wayne,Kraimer, & Sparrowe, 2003). Temporary employees enter into a reciprocalrelationship with both the client organization and the temp agency. New devel-opment practices at the client organization provide the temporary employeeswith social support to adjust and perform at the organization. Temporaryemployees may reciprocate for this support by exhibiting positive work-relatedattitudes. Similarly, NED practices at the temp agency provide support for tem-porary employees, and they reciprocate for this support by being more com-mitted and less willing to quit the temp agency. For temporary employees,there was a reciprocal social exchange for both the temp agency and the clientorganization.


The results of this study provide only partial support for all the mediationhypotheses. For the mediation hypotheses for job satisfaction (H6a and H6b),the mediating effect for the job satisfaction variable in relation to the clientorganization and temp agency are 0.21 and 0.09, respectively. These resultsindicate that NED practices directly impact turnover intention and indirectlyimpact turnover intention through its relationship to job satisfaction. This wasfound for both the client organization and the temp agency. Partial support forthe mediation hypotheses for organizational commitment (H7a and H7b) wasalso found. The mediating effects of organizational commitment for the clientorganization and the temp agency are 0.18 and 0.13, respectively. In this case,NED practices indirectly impact turnover intention through organizationalcommitment. The results are consistent with the major body of the research inthe turnover literature that suggests that attitudes such as job satisfaction andorganization commitment may be influenced by HRD practices, and these atti-tudes in turn cause turnover intention (Peterson, 2004; Winterton, 2004).

Limitations of the Study

A potential limitation of this study is the cross-sectional nature of theexperimental design used in this study. When drawing conclusions from across-sectional study, one should be cautious in making causal inferencesfrom the results of the study.

The existence of common method bias could be another limitation of thisstudy because all the information was collected from a single source. Becausethe study involved measuring temporary employee attitudes, collecting infor-mation from multiple sources was not an option. Following Podsakoff andOrgan’s (1986) advice, we used Harmon’s single-factor test to examine if com-mon method bias exists. The rationale for this test is that if common methodbias exists, a single factor will emerge from the analysis; this factor will accountfor most of the covariance in the independent and dependent variables. A fac-tor analysis of all the variables in this study was performed, and the resultsrevealed that no single factor emerged that explained more than 19% of thevariance. This suggests that common method bias is not an issue in this study.

A final potential limitation of this study includes the low response rate ofthe survey. Although a low response rate seems to be common in large-scalesurveys dealing with temporary workers, it is a limitation of this study.

Implications for HRD Research

The findings of this study have important implications for HRD research. In anenvironment that is constantly changing, organizations will search for ways toadapt to these changes. Management often turns to the use of temporary laborto maintain a flexible workforce. This study is believed to be the only investiga-tion of NED practices on temp employee work-related attitudes using the dual




nature of the client and temp agency perspective. HRD researchers should con-tinue to investigate other important HRD issues that may be relevant to tempemployees.

Throughout this article, the authors have noted that HRD practices have animportant influence on work-related attitudes and implied that the influencewas determined mainly through the connection with the socialization thatoccurs in the organization. Future research should also investigate how HRDpractices, including NED practices, influence temporary workers’ perceptionsof their role in the organization and the subsequent influences, not only onwork-related attitudes studied in this investigation but additional worker-relatedattitudes (i.e., organizational citizenship behavior) and organizational outcomes.

This study also formulated research questions in terms of dual attitudestoward the temp agency and independently toward the client organization. Wenoted that, using the existing literature on temporary employees, previousinvestigations mainly focused on differences between permanent and tempo-rary employees within the same organization. Because of the unique condi-tions of employment, social exchange theory, and the social identityperspective, we developed models of hypothesized relationships in which therewere no differences in the direction of the influences NED practices had towardthe client organization versus the temp agency. Future investigations shouldalso continue to investigate temporary employees from the perspective thatthere are dual attitudes toward the temp agency and client organization. How-ever, HRD researchers may find that there are some issues where there may bedifferences in the direction of influence when comparing one organization(temp agency) with the other (client organization).

In accordance with the suggestion by Klein (2001) that HRD researchersshould focus on organizations that include a broad range of industries andoccupations, the temporary employees participating in the study performedtheir work at organizations that included manufacturing, retail, and financialservices. These temporary employees were also from a variety of occupationssuch as clerical, industrial, and technical. Thus, the findings of this researchhave more external validity than investigations using temporary employeesconducted in a single organizational setting. Although this study provides moreexternal validity than studies using a single setting, HRD researchers shouldseek to replicate these findings beyond the types of organizations and types ofworkers participating in this study. Future research could focus on differenttypes of organizations such as professional organizations and different types ofworkers such as professional workers.

Another area needing further investigation is identifying what influencesNED practices have on organizational outcomes, such as customer orientationor satisfaction. Research on employee attitudes has shown that some employeeattitudes, such as organizational commitment, are positively related to cus-tomer orientation (e.g., Joshi & Randall, 2001). HRD researchers may extendthis research to temporary employees and investigate if HRD practices have a


positive influence on organizational outcomes such as customer orientationand customer satisfaction.

HRD researchers may also examine how the findings of this study influencecareer decisions of temporary employees. Some temporary employees actuallyuse the temporary arrangement with an organization to determine if the employeewould like to seek full-time, permanent employment with a particular organiza-tion. The role HRD practices play in this situation and their influences of thework-related attitudes of organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and inten-tion to leave could be important in the decision-making process temporaryemployees use in regard to their careers. In addition, future studies should inves-tigate whether NED practices and related HRD practices that are sustainedthroughout the temporary employee’s tenure at a client organization and theresulting levels of satisfaction with employee development at the organization havean influence on career decisions. Tansky and Cohen (2001) found that commonknowledge of a formal development program provides important perceptions oforganizational support that lead to organizational commitment.

Implications for HRD Managers

For HRD practitioners, this study confirms what many practitioner magazineshave been purporting. How organizations bring temporary employees into anorganization influences important aspects related to how an organization func-tions best. Employees entering an organization face considerable anxiety anduncertainty, and NED practices provide an important mechanism for adjust-ment and creating positive first impressions among newcomers. The entranceof temporary employees may be even more important because of their tempo-rary status with the organization.

In addition, the findings of this study imply several important implicationsfor practicing HRD managers. First, this study has shown that perceptions ofHRD’s NED practices are positively related to employee attitudes. The resultsseem to be in line with research in the organizational socialization showing thatthe first impressions of organizations formed by such practices have long-lasting effects on employees (Ashforth & Saks, 1996). As purveyors of theseall-important first impressions, HRD managers have a great responsibility toensure that NED practices are formalized and effectively implemented for newtemporary employee adjustment to the organizations.

Temporary and permanent employees are similar in the sense that whenorganizations provide the necessary social support to assist them in makingthe adjustment to the organization and help them feel like they are a part of theorganization, they become more satisfied and committed and are less likely toquit the organization. This is important for organizations that consider tem-porary employees to be a strategic resource (von Hippel, Mangum, Green-berger, Skoglind, & Heneman, 1997). In contrast, if the organizations treattemporary employees as expendable (Koene & van Riemsdijk, 2005) and do




not provide NED practices, it could lead to more turnover. Research has alsoshown that employee job satisfaction and commitment are related to factorssuch as customer satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors (e.g.,Koys, 2001). In organizations that use a large number of temporary employ-ees, treating temporary employees as expendable can lead to less customer sat-isfaction and organizational citizenship behavior and increase the possibilityof negatively affecting a company’s performance.

This study has addressed the issue of the dual nature of temporary employ-ees’ attitudes. This will be helpful for HRD managers to pinpoint problem areasthat require corrective action. From an HRD perspective, one of the key differ-ences between temporary and permanent employees is that the former will haveattitudes toward two organizations. Addressing this duality enhances our under-standing of employee attitudes of temporary employees. The study’s results haveshown that turnover intention toward the client organization is a function ofNED practices at the client organization and job satisfaction and commit-ment toward the client organization more than job satisfaction and commitmenttoward the temp agency. Similarly, turnover intention toward the temp agencyis more a function of NED practices at the temp agency and job satisfaction andorganizational commitment toward the temp agency. Such delineation not onlyaddresses the issue in a realistic manner but also offers clues for practicing man-agers for resolving issues. For example, we found that employee intention toquit the client organization is more likely due to NED practices at the clientorganization and attitudes toward the client organization. That is, a temporaryemployee who is trying to quit a client is more likely to do so because the clientorganization fails to provide the necessary social support, possibly due to thelack of NED practices. Similarly, the lack of use of NED practices at the tempagency may be the reason employees want to quit the temp agency. Organiza-tions that routinely employ temp workers and temp agencies need to focus onproviding not only more but also effective NED practices for temporary employ-ees to increase their commitment to the organization and reduce turnover.

References

Allen, D. G. (2004, August). Do organizational socialization tactics influence newcomer embed-dedness and turnover? Academy of Management Proceedings, New Orleans.

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). Organizational socialization tactics: A longitudinal analysis oflinks to newcomers’ commitment and role orientation. Academy of Management Journal, 33,847–858.

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

Ashforth, B. E., & Saks, A. M. (1996). Socialization tactics: Longitudinal effects on newcomeradjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 149–178.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psy-chological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.


Bartlett, K. (2001). The relationship between training and organizational commitment: A studyin the health care field. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 335–352.

Bartlett, K., & Kang, D. (2004). Training and organizational commitment among nurses follow-ing industry and organizational change in New Zealand and the United States. Human ResourceDevelopment International, 7, 426–440.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment,

and personal need non-fulfillment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39–52.Currivan, D. B. (1999). The causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in

models of employee turnover. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 495–524.Dutton J., Dukerich, J., & Harquail, C. (1994). Organizational images and member identifica-

tion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 239–263.Estavo, M., & Latch, S. (1999). Measuring temporary labor outsourcing. NBER working paper

7424. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Feldman, D., Doerpinghaus, H. I., & Turnley, W. H. (1994). Managing temporary workers: A

permanent HRM challenge. Organizational Dynamics, 23, 49–64.Fogarty, T. J., & Dirsmith, M. W. (2001). Organizational socialization as instrument and symbol:

An extended institutional theory perspective. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12,247–266.

Foote, D. A. (2004). Temporary workers and managing the problem of unscheduled turnover.Management Decision, 42, 863–874.

Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). Meta-analysis of antecedents and correlatesof employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the nextmillennium. Journal of Management, 26, 463–476.

Holton, E. F., III (1995). College graduates’ experiences and attitudes during organizational entry.Human Resource Development Quarterly, 6, 59–78.

Holton, E. F., III (1996). New employee development: A review and reconceptualization. HumanResource Development Quarterly, 7, 233–252.

Holton, E. F., III (2001). New employee development tactics: Perceived availability, helpfulness,and relationship with job attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16, 73–85.

Hom, P. W., & Griffeth, R. W. (1995). Employee turnover. Cincinnati: South-Western.Hom, P. W., Griffeth, R. W., Palich, L. E., & Bracker, J. S. (1999). Revisiting met expectations as

a reason why realistic job previews work. Personnel Psychology, 52, 97–113.Hom, P. W., & Kinicki, A. J. (2001). Toward a greater understanding of how dissatisfaction drives

employee turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 975–988.Jacobs, R. L., & Washington, C. (2003). Employee development and organizational performance:

A review of the literature and directions for future research. Human Resource DevelopmentInternational, 6, 343–354.

Joshi, A. W., & Randall, S. (2001). The indirect effect of organizational control on sales personperformance and customer orientation. Journal of Business Research, 54 (1), 1–9.

Kinicki, A. J., Carson, K. P., & Bohlander, G. W. (1992). Relationship between an organization’sactual human resource efforts and employee attitudes. Group and Organization Management,17, 135–152.

Klein, H. J. (2001). Invited reaction: The relationship between training and organizationalcommitment—A study in the healthcare field. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 39–52.

Koene, B., & van Riemsdijk, M. (2005). Managing temporary workers: Work identity, diversity,and operational HR choices. Human Resource Management Journal, 15, 76–92.

Koys, D. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, andturnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology,54, 101–114.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Kraimer, M. L., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2003). Dual commitment ofcontingent workers: An examination of contingent’s commitment to agent and organization.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 609–625.




Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Hand-book of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Lowry, D. S., Simon, A., & Kimberly, N. (2002). Toward improved employee relations practicesof casual employees in the New South Wales registered club industry. Human Resource Devel-opment Quarterly, 13, 53–71.

Lyons, T. (1971). Role conflict, need for clarity, satisfaction, tension, and withdrawal. Organiza-tional Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 99–110.

Mabey, C. (1986). Graduates into industry. Aldershot, England: Gower.Madsen, S. R., Miller, D., & John, C. R. (2005). Readiness for organizational change: Do organi-

zational commitment and social relationships in the workplace make a difference? HumanResource Development Quarterly, 16, 247–266.

Meyer, J. P., & Smith, C. A. (2000). HRM practices and organizational commitment: A test of amediating model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 12, 319–331.

Moorman, R. H., & Harland, L. K. (2002). Temporary employees as good citizens: Factorsinfluencing their OCB performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 171–187.

Mowday, R. T., Koberg, C. S., & McArthur, A. W. (1984). The psychology of the withdrawalprocess: A cross-validation test of Mobley’s intermediate linkages model of turnover in twosamples. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 79–94.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizationalcommitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–247.

Neumark, D., & Reed, D. (2002). Employment relationships in the new economy. NBER workingpaper 8910. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Ogilvie, J. R. (1986). The role of human resource practices in predicting organizational commit-ment. Group and Organization Studies, 11, 335–359.

Park, H., Mitsuhashi, H. M., Fey, C., & Bjorkman, I. (2003). The effect of human resource man-agement practices on Japanese MNC subsidiary performance: A partial mediating model.International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 391–407.

Peterson, S. L. (2004). Toward a theoretical model of employee turnover: A human resourcedevelopment perspective. Human Resource Development Review, 3, 209–226.

Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self reports in organizational research: Problems andprospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531–544.

Price, J. L. (1977). The study of turnover. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Recruitment and Employment Confederation (2002). Agency workers directive: Recent surveys

and opinions. Retrieved May 25, 2005, from http://www.rec.uk.com/rec/lobbying/AWDResponseOct2002Appendix1.pdf.

Robertson, I. T., & Mindel, R. M. (1980). A study of trainability testing. Journal of OccupationalPsychology, 53, 131–140.

Rowden, R. W., & Ahmad, S. (2000). The relationship between workplace learning and job sat-isfaction in small to mid-sized businesses in Malaysia. Human Resource Development Interna-tional, 3, 307–332.

Tansky, J. W., & Cohen, D. J. (2001). The relationship between organizational support, employeedevelopment, and organizational commitment: An empirical study. Human Resource Develop-ment Quarterly, 12, 285–300.

Thorsteinson, T. J. (2003). Job attitudes of temporary workers vs. full time workers: A meta ana-lytic review. Journal of Organizational and Occupational Psychology, 72, 151–178.

van Hooft, E.A.J., Bon, M., Taris, T. W., & van der Flier, H. (2004). Job search and theory ofplanned behavior: Minority-majority group differences in the Netherlands. Journal of VocationalBehavior, 65, 366.

von Hippel, C., Mangum, S. L., Greenberger, D. B., Skoglind, J. D., & Heneman, R. L. (1997).Temporary employment: Can organizations and employees both win? Academy of ManagementExecutive, 11, 93–104.


van Maanen, J. (1978). People processing: Strategies for organizational socialization. Organiza-tional Dynamics, 7, 18–36.

Winterton, J. (2004). A conceptual model of labour turnover and retention. Human ResourceDevelopment International, 7, 371–390.

Jeffrey P. Slattery is an associate professor at Northeastern State University-BrokenArrow, Broken Arrow, OK.

T. T. Selvarajan is an assistant professor at the School of Business of the Universityof Houston-Victoria, Sugar Land, TX.

John E. Anderson is an assistant professor at the College of Business of the EastCarolina University, Greenville, NC.


influences of new employee development practices on temporary employee work-related attitudes

Documents