We Are All Friends and Family Here!
How Jobseekers React to Communal Job Advertisements
Abstract
Abstract: Organizations trying to attract talents sometimes promise friendships or family-like workplace relations in their job advertisements. This research examined how jobseekers of different ages react to such promises of communal workplace relationships. In two experiments (N = 292 and N = 343), we found consistent evidence that, compared to conventional exchange-oriented job advertisements, communal job advertisements led jobseekers to assume lower organizational performance standards. However, no differences were apparent in their job-choice intentions. While the jobseekers’ age did not moderate these relationships, we found that older employees generally expected higher organizational performance standards. These experiments combine relationship and recruitment research and contribute to our understanding of how people react to the mingling of different relationship norms in the work context. Practically speaking, the findings suggest that the usage of communal job advertisements might not be in the best interest of organizational performance.
Zusammenfassung: Auf ihrer Suche nach Talenten versprechen manche Organisationen in ihren Stellenanzeigen Freundschaften oder familienähnliche Beziehungen am Arbeitsplatz. Ziel dieser Studie war es, zu untersuchen, wie Arbeitssuchende unterschiedlichen Alters auf ein solches Versprechen von kommunalen Beziehungen am Arbeitsplatz reagieren. Zwei Experimente (N = 292 und N = 343) zeigten, dass kommunale Stellenanzeigen im Vergleich zu konventionellen, austauschorientierten Stellenanzeigen dazu führten, dass Arbeitssuchende von niedrigeren Leistungsstandards im Unternehmen ausgingen. Es zeigten sich jedoch keine Unterschiede in ihrer Bewerbungsabsicht. Während das Alter der Arbeitssuchenden diese Zusammenhänge nicht moderierte, fanden wir, dass Ältere generell höhere Leistungsstandards im Unternehmen erwarteten. Die vorliegenden Experimente verbinden Beziehungs- und Recruitingforschung und tragen zum Wissen darüber bei, wie Menschen auf die Vermischung verschiedener Beziehungsnormen im Arbeitskontext reagieren. Für die Praxis lässt sich vorsichtig ableiten, dass die Verwendung von kommunalen Stellenanzeigen möglicherweise nicht im besten Interesse hoher Leistungsstandards im Unternehmen ist.
Many of today’s work environments have become increasingly informal (Githens, 2011). Correspondingly, some organizations promise communal relationships among their employees in their job advertisements or core values. That is, they describe workplace relationships as amicable, cordial, heartfelt, or family-like (e. g., AirOn, 2021; BJ’s Restaurants, 2017; Covelli Enterprises, 2014; Google, 2014; HotelCareer, 2020; Mindsquare, 2020). This focus on friendship and sociableness in some job advertisements may come as a surprise since the workplace usually involves involuntary and formal relationships (Pillemer & Rothbard, 2018). It further induces us to apply exchange norms (Clark & Mills, 2011). That is, jobholders usually monitor the balance between giving and receiving and expect contingent repayments of favors and benefits at work – which is not typical for friendships or family relationships, which are characterized by communal norms, thus concerns about the relationship partner’s welfare (Clark & Mills, 1979). Complexities that might follow when communal relations are mixed up with economic exchanges have been described in different work settings (e. g., Aggarwal, 2004; Costas, 2012; Grayson, 2007; Hommelhoff, 2019; McGraw & Tetlock, 2005).
This research integrates relationship theory into the field of recruitment to understand how jobseekers react to communal job advertisements. Do communal job advertisements, compared with conventional business-oriented job advertisements, change jobseekers’ intentions and expectations toward the recruiting organization? We examine two applicant reactions or prehire outcomes – jobseekers’ job-choice intentions and their expectation of organizational performance standards (Hausknecht et al., 2004; Rynes, 1991). We aim to understand whether jobseekers would accept a potential job offer and whether they sense that there exists a high-performance culture in the organization. Since Western societies are today characterized by an aging workforce and an increasing competition of organizations to attract young talents (Hertel & Zacher, 2018), this research further explores whether jobseekers’ age makes a difference in their reactions to these different kinds of job advertisements. To examine our research questions, we conducted two experiments: Study 1 was conducted among students and employees, while Study 2 replicated and extended the findings of Study 1 in a sample of employees. Building on the relationship theory of Clark and Mills (1979,2011), the present studies integrate relationship and recruitment research (e. g., Hausknecht et al., 2004; Rynes, 1991) by advancing the knowledge of how people of different ages react to the mingling of different relationship norms in the context of recruitment. As to its practical implications, this research aims to help managers to adapt their recruitment strategies in times where it has become critical to attracting talented applicants.
Theoretical Background
Norms that govern human behavior can differ depending on the relationship context, so that individuals usually apply different norms at work and at home (Clark & Mills, 2011). In this context, Clark and Mills (1979,1993) introduced the distinction between exchange and communal relationships. Exchange relationships are typical for business and work environments, while communal relationships prevail in families and friendships (Clark & Mills, 2011). In exchange relationships, the members benefit each other either in response to a specific benefit or in the expectation of receiving a comparable benefit in return (Clark & Mills, 1979, 2011). In the context of recruitment, it is therefore expected that job advertisements include a description of what an organization has to offer (e. g., an attractive salary and promising career prospects) in return for the future jobholder’s inputs (e. g., hard work and expertise). Although it is generally expected that organizational members help and support each other, the workplace usually prompts jobholders to expect support from others in return (Clark & Mills, 2011; Pillemer & Rothbard, 2018). Thus, the mindset is typically more calculative than in nonorganizational, personal contexts (Belmi & Pfeffer, 2015).
In contrast to exchange relationships, communal relationships are characterized by a concern for the welfare of the other relationship member. Thus, in communal relationships, relationship members support and help each other without expecting comparable benefits in return (Clark & Mills, 2011). In such relationships, members do not keep track of their efforts and do not feel exploited when benefits are not specifically returned (Clark & Mills, 2011). Moreover, communal relationships often imply a more long-term perspective. For instance, family relations, friendships, or romantic relationships are mostly communal (Clark & Mills, 2011).
Since the work context typically induces exchange norms, it is counterintuitive for job advertisements to hint at communal norms, for example, by promising friendships. Although some workplace relationships might turn into friendships, it is unlikely that communal norms are applied in interactions with all organizational members (Pillemer & Rothbard, 2018). Past research (e. g., Aggarwal, 2004; Heyman & Ariely, 2004; Hommelhoff & Wangenheim, 2015; McGraw & Tetlock, 2005) revealed that the blending of communal frames and market exchanges complicates formerly clear relationships or exchanges. When exchange norms are applied to communal relations, for example, relationship members feel moral indignation and cognitive confusion (McGraw & Tetlock, 2005); when communal relationships, such as friendship, are promoted in the context of sales, consumers expect to a lesser extent that their service is aligned to their profitability (Hommelhoff & Wangenheim, 2015). Building on these studies, this research examines how jobseekers react to job advertisements that hint at the concepts of friendship and family, thus intermixing exchange relations with communal relationships. By varying the content of job advertisements, this research also follows previous studies showing that even small variations in recruitment materials can have substantial effects on jobseekers’ perceptions and reactions (e. g., Dineen & Noe, 2009; Feldman et al., 2006; Gaucher et al., 2011; Walker et al., 2012). Gendered wording has become a particularly prominent topic in previous recruitment research – showing that women tend to apply for jobs that involve prototypically feminine adjectives in job descriptions (e. g., Born & Taris, 2010; Gaucher et al., 2011) – while age differences have been relatively neglected so far.
Applicant Reactions: Job-Choice Intentions and Expected Performance Standards
The recruitment image affects jobseekers’ initial decisions to seek contact with an organization. Thus, researchers have examined different kinds of wording in job advertisements (e. g., Feldman et al., 2006; Gaucher et al., 2011). In this context, Hausknecht and colleagues (2004) used the terms “applicant reactions” or “applicant perceptions,” while Rynes (1991) proposed a distinction between prehire and posthire outcomes. Job-choice intentions (Cable & Judge, 1996) and the perception of high organizational performance standards (Sheridan, 1992) are considered relevant reactions or prehire outcomes, whereas the actual performance of a new hire is considered a central posthire outcome (Rynes, 1991). Job-choice intentions refer to the intent to take the steps that are necessary to get a specific job (i. e., applying for and accepting a potential job offer; Cable & Judge, 1996; Collins, 2007), while the perception of high organizational performance standards refers to sensing “organizational norms of high expectations for performance and personal achievement” (Sheridan, 1992, p. 1044).
Organizations that describe their workplace relationships in communal terms want to provide readers with positive cues about their social work environment and organizational culture (Costas, 2012). By providing not only cues for economic success but also for a cordial, amicable work environment, such organizations appeal to jobseekers’ basic need for social relatedness and belonging (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). It further reflects that people prefer to be around people they like, also at work (Casciaro & Lobo, 2008). Hence, we assume that such job advertisements generally enhance job-choice intentions, that is, we suggest that terms like “friend” or “family” activate communal norms in readers’ minds (Aggarwal, 2004), leading to positive reactions:
Hypothesis 1: Jobseekers report higher job-choice intentions in response to communal job advertisements referring to the concepts of friendship (a) or family (b) than in response to conventional business job advertisements referring to exchange norms.
Communal job advertisements might help organizations to enlarge their applicant pool. However, we assume that such a mingling of exchange and communal norms complicates the prospective relationship for the organization. Past research has shown that the activation of certain relationship norms changes perceptions, interpretations, and reactions in subsequent exchanges (e. g., Aggarwal, 2004; McGraw & Tetlock, 2005). The mentioning of friendship or family-like relations is likely to activate communal norms in jobseekers’ minds, which are not necessarily compatible with the organizations’ desire for hardworking employees. Such notions in job advertisements might lead jobseekers to think in terms of concern and welfare and not in terms of contingent reciprocation (Clark & Mills, 2011). Put simply, if an organization promises friendships or family-like relations, it is probably also expected to focus on the organizational members’ well-being for their own sake and not as a means to the end of organizational performance. Hence, if job advertisements sound cordial and heartfelt, it is likely that readers assume that the advertising organization might not focus on employee performance as strongly as other organizations:
Hypothesis 2: Jobseekers expect organizational performance standards to be lower when the organization uses communal job advertisements referring to the concepts of friendship (a) or family (b) instead of conventional business job advertisements referring to exchange norms.
The Role of Age
Workplace relationships can be considered peripheral compared to relationships with one’s core family (Kahn & Antonucci, 1980). In the context of socioemotional selectivity theory (Carstensen, 2006), it has further been shown that social networks become smaller with age while comprising an increasingly greater proportion of well-known social partners (English & Carstensen, 2014). Hence, this theory suggests that older adults might not seek as many new social contacts at work as younger adults since they concentrate on deepening already existing, emotionally meaningful relationships. Thus, job advertisements promising new friends or family-like relations at work might be more attractive for younger than for older jobseekers. Older jobseekers might even perceive fun-and-friends-related terms as an implicit message that this job advertisement is actually aimed at the younger workforce (Burn et al., 2019; Tews et al., 2014), which is said to prefer a more informal and less hierarchical work environment (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010).
Hypothesis 3: The effect proposed in Hypothesis 1 is moderated by age. The positive effect of communal job advertisements referring to the concepts of friendship (a) or family (b) on job-choice intentions will be stronger for younger jobseekers than for older jobseekers.
Meta-analytic research has demonstrated that workers perceive less role ambiguity, role conflict, and role overload with increasing age (Ng & Feldman, 2010). Older workers also experience fewer relationship conflicts at work (Ng & Feldman, 2010). Thus, it seems that workers experience their work environments and relationships as clearer with increasing age, possibly because they have developed more realistic job expectations over time (e. g., Bal et al., 2008; Goodwin & O’Connor, 2012). Such expectations are likely to include that it is unrealistic to assume that employers do not expect contingent reciprocation, even if they characterize relationships as communal. Because this research suggests that older jobholders are more experienced, realistic, and less prone to mix different relationship norms at work, we assume the following:
Hypothesis 4: The effect proposed in Hypothesis 2 is moderated by age. The negative effect of communal job advertisements referring to the concepts of friendship (a) or family (b) on the expected organizational performance standards is stronger for younger jobseekers than for older jobseekers.
We tested our hypotheses in two scenario experiments. Study 1 involved the promise of workplace friendship and thus tested Hypotheses 1a−4a in a sample of students and employees. As a further operationalization of communal relationship norms, Study 2 also involved the promise of family-like workplace relationships and thus provided a test for all hypotheses in a sample of employees.
Study 1
Method
Design and Participants
N = 292 German-speaking participants (59.2 % female; M = 30.60 years, SD = 9.99 years, Mdn = 28.00 years, range 18 – 57 years) were recruited via postings in social online networks to take part in this between-subjects online experiment with two experimental conditions (communal job advertisement referring to friendship; conventional job advertisement implicating exchange norms). Of our sample, 40.4 % were students (60.2 % female, M = 23.14 years, SD = 3.61 years) and 59.6 % were working adults (58.6 % female, M = 35.66 years, SD = 9.77 years). About one-fourth (24.1 %) of these working adults held a leadership position, and about one-third (30.5 %) had a university degree. 77 % were salaried employees, 8.6 % were blue-collar workers, 7.9 % were self-employed, and 6.3 % were civil servants. The sample size was based on power analyses (Faul et al., 2007) that yielded a size of N = 296 (α = .05, power = .99, medium effect size: f = .25).
Materials and Procedure
The experiment involved four steps. First, two baseline questions were asked to control for selection bias (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). These questions were “Nowadays, organizations expect high performance from their employees” and “Organizations are usually trustworthy,” each measured on a scale from 1 (agree not at all) to 5 (agree very much).
Second, participants were randomized into two different experimental conditions, a communal job advertisement (n = 142, 58.5 % female, M = 29.57 years, SD = 9.03 years) and a conventional job advertisement (n = 150, 60.0 % female, M = 31.57 years, SD = 10.76 years) of a fictitious company called KfA products (see ESM). In both conditions, participants were told that they should imagine being on a job search, and that the following advertisement fits relatively well to their prior work experience. One version of the job advertisement involved five phrases that were used to make a particularly warm and amicable impression (our amicable working climate … we offer interesting tasks within a cordial, amicable work environment … you are a cordial personality … Be a part of our team and work with friends, not only colleagues … a companionate team culture). The second version was equally worded except for five phrases; instead of using the amicable phrases, this advertisement used five common professional phrases instead (our positive working climate … we offer interesting tasks within an owner-managed enterprise … you are a professional personality … Be a part of our organization and collaborate successfully with your new colleagues … a cooperative team culture). To prevent potential age discrimination, we included in both advertisements that the organization seeks “employees of all ages.” Both advertisements were adapted from real-world examples and discussed among the authors and two further researchers.
The third step was a manipulation check (adapted from Aggarwal, 2004). Using 7 items on a scale from 1 (agree not at all) to 5 (agree very much), we asked participants how “cordial,” “caring,” “likable,” and “amicable” they perceived the organization’s job advertisement (Cronbach’s α = .90). Moreover, using 5 items on a scale from 1 (agree not at all) to 5 (agree very much), participants reported how “businesslike” and “profit-oriented” they perceived the presented job advertisement (α = .81).
Fourth, we assessed the dependent variables, respondents’ job-choice intentions and their expectations of organizational performance standards. Since job-choice intentions are often measured with single items, we used 2 single items from existing studies (Cable & Judge, 1996; Taylor & Bergmann, 1987), for example, “Please rate the likelihood that you would accept a job offer from this organization, if it were offered” (Cable & Judge, 1996). We further adapted one item from Collins (2007; “How likely is it that you will send an application to KfA products?”), also answered on a scale from 1 (highly unlikely) to 5 (highly likely), to measure this construct with 3 items (α = .89). The expectation of organizational performance standards was also measured by 3 items (α = .82) adapted from the measurement of transformational leadership (i. e., the subscale “performance expectations”; Pearce & Sims, 2002). Instead of a leader with high performance expectations, we inserted KfA products. A sample item was “KfA products expects highest work performance,” answered on a scale from 1 (highly unlikely) to 5 (highly likely).
Results
Preliminary Analyses
The experimental groups did not differ in their response to the two baseline questions, F(1, 290) = 1.03, p = .31, η2 = .004 and F(1, 290) = 3.23, p = .07, η2 = .009. Thus, there were no differences among groups regarding the general expectation of organizational performance standards and generalized trust toward organizations from the outset of the study. The manipulation check revealed that the communal job advertisement was indeed perceived as more cordial (Mcommunal = 3.65, SD = 0.69; Mexchange = 3.23, SD = 0.71), F(1, 290) = 25.35, p < .001, η2 = .08, while the conventional job advertisement was perceived as more business-like (Mexchange= 3.80, SD = 0.63; Mcommunal = 3.14, SD = 0.85), F(1, 290) = 56.50, p < .001, η2 = .16.
Intercorrelations (see Table 1) showed that age was generally related to the expectation of higher organizational performance standards (r = .20, p < .001) but not to job-choice intentions (r = -.05, p = .39). Further, job-choice intentions and expectations of high organizational performance standards were positively related (r = .21, p < .001).
Hypothesis Tests
We conducted a multivariate analysis of variance with the type of job advertisement (communal versus conventional) as independent variable and job-choice intentions and expectation of organizational performance standards as dependent variables. Following prior research (e. g., Hook et al., 2007; Menary et al., 2013), we included age as a metric, continuous covariate. Only in the follow-up analysis did we include age group as an independent variable (148 younger adults aged less than or equal to 28 and 144 adults aged over 28 years; for more age and exploratory gender analyses, see Footnote 1).1
The analysis revealed that the manipulation of the job advertisements showed an effect, F(2, 287) = 8.39, p < .001, η2 = .06. However, not in line with Hypothesis 1a, jobseekers did not report higher job-choice intentions after reading the communal job advertisement referring to the concept of friendship, F(1, 288) = .44, p = .51, η2 = .002. Supporting Hypothesis 2a, the analysis revealed that jobseekers indeed expected organizational performance standards to be lower when the organization used a communal job advertisement referring to friendship as compared to a conventional business job advertisement (Mcommunal = 3.69, SD = 0.87, Mexchange = 4.07, SD = 0.72), F (1, 288) = 16.76, p < .001, η2 = .06. Figure 1 illustrates this effect. As to Hypotheses 3a and 4a, the analyses demonstrated that the job advertisement × age interaction was not significant, F(2, 287) = 0.24 , p = .79, η2 = .002; hence, Hypotheses 3a and 4a were not supported. However, further analyses showed a main effect of jobseekers’ age, F(2, 287) = 6.59, p = .002, η2 = .04. In line with the correlation reported above (see also Table 1), the follow-up analysis showed that older adults generally expected higher performance standards (Myounger = 3.74, SD = 0.79, Molder = 4.03, SD = 0.81), F(1, 288) = 9.15, p = .003, η2 = .03. There were no age differences regarding job-choice intentions, F(1, 288) = 0.25, p = .61, η2 = .001.
Discussion
Study 1 provides first evidence that, compared to conventional business-oriented job advertisements, communal job advertisements make a difference regarding jobseekers’ reactions. Although communal job advertisements promising workplace friendships did not result in higher job-choice intentions, they indeed led jobseekers to assume lower organizational performance standards. It seems that communal norms were activated by terms related to friendship, and that this activation led respondents to think more strongly in terms of welfare and concern than respondents who read conventional job advertisements implicating exchange norms. While there were no moderating effects of jobseekers’ age, the study further revealed that older adults appear to generally expect higher organizational performance standards.
To corroborate and extend these findings, we set up a second experiment that also addressed the potential limitations of Study 1. Since the sample of Study 1 included students (because they are likely to seek jobs soon), the mean age was relatively young. Thus, Study 2 aimed to replicate Study 1 using an older sample with employees only. Study 2 further strived to extend Study 1 by including a second operationalization of communal norms, that is, a job advertisement referring to the concept of family. Finally, Study 2 also asked if job advertisements were perceived as credible to consider that jobseekers might not fully believe what is promised in communal advertisements.
Study 2
Method
Design and Participants
This study employed a between-subjects design with three experimental conditions (communal job advertisement referring either to friendship or to family; conventional job advertisement implicating exchange norms). An online panel provider sent our study link out to a sample of German-speaking employees. For their participation, respondents received € 1. The initial sample comprised N = 362 employees (49.4 % female, M = 41.76 years, SD = 12.05 years). We removed n = 19 “speeders” (21.1 % female, M = 37.26 years, SD = 10.85 years) from the sample who completed the study unrealistically fast (Meade & Craig, 2012). Thus, the final sample consisted of N = 343 employees (51.0 % female, M = 42.01 years, SD = 12.08 years, Mdn = 43.00 years, range 18 – 65 years). About one-fourth (27.1 %) held a leadership position and about one-third (34.0 %) had a university degree. 65.8 % were salaried employees, 16.7 % were blue-collar workers, 12.3 % were self-employed, and 5.2 % were civil servants. The sample size was based on power analyses (Faul et al., 2007) that yielded a size of N = 346 (α = .05, power = .99, medium effect size: f = .25).
Materials and Procedure
The setup was like Study 1. First, the same baseline questions were used. Second, participants were randomized to three different conditions, a communal job advertisement promising friendships (n = 105, 54.3 % female, M = 41.52 years, SD = 11.94 years), a communal job advertisement promising family-like relations (n = 105, 55.2 % female, M = 41.50 years, SD = 12.29 years), and a conventional job advertisement implying exchange norms (n = 133, 45.1 % female, M = 42.79 years, SD = 12.08 years). The friendship advertisement and the conventional business version were the same as in Study 1. The family version was newly developed in parallel to the two existing ones (also see ESM) and involved five phrases used to make a particularly cordial, family-like impression (our familial working atmosphere … you are a cordial personality … within a family-like enterprise … Be a part of our work family and spend time with colleagues who are always there for you … a family-like team culture).
As a manipulation check, participants were asked how cordial and how businesslike they perceived the presented advertisements. We used 8 items on a scale from 1 (agree not at all) to 5 (agree very much) to assess how cordial the advertisement was perceived; 7 items were identical to the ones used in Study 1, and the item “family-like” was added (α = .94). Regarding the business version, we used the same 5 items as in Study 1 (α = .84). We further added 4 items, adapted from Feldman and colleagues (2006), to assess how “genuine” and “credible” the given job advertisement was perceived (α = .95). Items were also rated on a scale from 1 (agree not at all) to 5 (agree very much).
Finally, we assessed respondents’ job-choice intentions (3 items; α = .87) and their expectation of organizational performance standards (6 items; α = .83). We used the same 3-item scale as in Study 1 for respondents’ job-choice intentions. As to the anticipated performance standards, we used the items from Study 1 and added 3 items adapted from the German version of the transformational leadership inventory (i. e., the subscale “high performance expectations”; Heinitz & Rowold, 2007; Podsakoff et al., 1990). A new sample item was “KfA products will not settle for second best.”
Results
Preliminary Analyses
The experimental groups did not differ in terms of the two baseline questions, F(2, 340) = 0.94, p = .39, η2 = .006 and F(2, 340) = 1.44, p = .24, η2 = .008. The analysis of the manipulation check, using Bonferroni posthoc tests, demonstrated that both communal job advertisements (p < .001) were perceived as more cordial than the conventional business job advertisement (Mcommunal_amicable = 3.95, SD = 0.60; Mcommunal_family-like = 3.88, SD = 0.72; Mexchange = 3.54, SD = 0.70, F(2, 340) = 12.56, p < .001, η2 = .07), while the conventional, business-oriented job advertisement was perceived as more businesslike and profit-oriented (p < .001) than both communal job advertisements (Mexchange= 3.91, SD = 0.65; Mcommunal_amicable = 3.45, SD = 0.76; Mcommunal_family-like = 3.55, SD = 0.63, F(2, 340) = 14.07, p < .001, η2 = .08).
There were no differences between experimental groups in the evaluation of how credible the given job advertisement was perceived (Mcommunal_amicable = 3.41, SD = 0.81; Mcommunal_family-like = 3.48, SD = 0.94; Mexchange= 3.51, SD = 0.76, F(2, 340) = 0.47, p = .63, η2 = .003). Like Study 1, intercorrelations of central study variables revealed that age was related to the expectation of higher organizational performance standards (r = .31, p < .001) but not to job-choice intentions in general (r = .02, p = .67; see Table 1). Organizational performance standards and job-choice intentions were again positively related (r = .12, p = .03).
Hypothesis Tests
As in Study 1, we conducted a multivariate analysis of variance with the type of job advertisement as independent variable and job-choice intentions and expectation of organizational performance standards as dependent variables. Again, we included age as a metric, continuous covariate; only in the follow-up analysis did we include age group as an independent variable (173 younger employees aged less than or equal 43; and 170 employees aged over 43 years; again, see Footnote 1 for further age and gender analyses).
Our analyses revealed that the manipulation of the job advertisements had an effect, F(4, 672) = 3.75, p = .005, η2 = .02. However, not supporting Hypothesis 1, respondents did not report higher job-choice intentions after reading either of the communal job advertisements, F(2, 337) = 0.46, p = .64, η2 = .003. Supporting Hypothesis 2, analyses showed that jobseekers indeed anticipated organizational performance standards to be lower when the organization used communal job advertisements referring either to the concept of friendship or family as compared to a conventional business job advertisement (Mcommunal_amicable = 3.75, SD = 0.78; Mcommunal_family-like = 3.71, SD = 0.64; Mexchange = 4.01, SD = 0.70, F(2, 337) = 6.69, p = .001, η2 = .04). Figure 1 illustrates this effect. That is, as expected, Bonferroni posthoc tests showed that the mean difference between both communal advertisements was not significant (p = 1.00), while the mean differences between each communal advertisement, amicable and family-like, and the conventional business advertisement were significant (p = .018 and p = .005, respectively). This results pattern in terms of Hypothesis 2 was stable when the analyses were conducted using only the three-item scale that was used in Study 1.
Our analyses further revealed that the job advertisement × age interaction was not significant, F(4, 672) = 0.66, p = .62, η2 = .004; hence, Hypotheses 3 and 4 were not supported. However, our analyses demonstrated a main effect of respondents’ age, F(2, 336) = 16.90, p < .001, η2 = .09. Consonant with the correlation reported above (see Table 1), the follow-up analysis showed that older employees generally anticipated higher organizational performance standards (Myounger = 3.63, SD = 0.71; Molder = 4.05, SD = 0.66, F(1, 337) = 32.92, p < .001, η2 = .09). No age differences were found in terms of job-choice intentions, F(1, 337) = 1.27, p = .26, η2 = .004.1
Discussion
Study 2 replicated the findings of Study 1 in a sample of employees by showing that communally worded job advertisements did not result in higher job-choice intentions but led readers to assume lower organizational performance standards. Study 2 has also shown no moderating effects of jobseekers’ age; yet, older adults again reported anticipating higher organizational performance standards in general. Further, Study 2 extended Study 1 by demonstrating that the reference to the family concept in job advertisements led to the same outcomes as the reference to the friendship concept. It seems that both operationalizations of communal norms equally activate these norms in readers’ minds, leading them to think more in terms of concern and welfare and thus assuming lower organizational performance standards compared to readers who received conventional job advertisements designed to activate exchange norms. Importantly, Study 2 also showed that communally worded job advertisements were perceived as equally credible as conventional job advertisements. However, some respondents who were randomized to one of the communal conditions may not have liked or believed the job advertisement and thus rushed through the survey as “speeders” (from the 19 speeders, who were mostly male, 15 had been randomized to one of the communal conditions), resulting in a somewhat larger group who read the business-oriented job advertisement (n = 133) compared to the groups who read the communal job advertisements (n = 105 in both groups).
General Discussion
This research examined how jobseekers of different ages react to job advertisements that promise communal workplace relationships. Two experiments found consistent evidence that such communal job advertisements, compared to conventional business-oriented job advertisements, led jobseekers to assume lower organizational performance standards. However, we found no apparent differences in their job-choice intentions. While jobseekers’ age did not moderate these relationships, both studies further suggested that older employees generally expect higher organizational performance standards.
Surprisingly, both experiments supported neither the hypothesized age interactions nor differences in job-choice intentions. As to job-choice intentions, our findings suggest that the promise of communal workplace relations in job advertisements is not decisive in respondents’ decision-making. The promise of cooperative workplace relationships (as evident in the business-oriented job advertisements) seems to suffice. Other aspects, for example, location and expected compensation, could be more important when it comes to such job-choice decisions at an early stage of the application process (e. g., Barber & Roehling, 1993). Perhaps later – when in personal contact via job interviews or assessment centers – it could be more important for the candidates’ intentions and decisions on how they assess the quality of social relationships in this workplace. As to age, our findings suggest that communal job advertisements do not speak differently to jobseekers of different ages; it seems that younger people are not more attracted to “friends-and-family” work environments. In terms of our age hypotheses, we started from the premise that older jobseekers might not look for new friends at work since they probably focus on already existing emotionally meaningful relationships (Carstensen, 2006). However, when on a job search anyway, it is possible that older jobseekers feel somewhat attracted by workplaces that stress emotionally meaningful relationships. Thus, these two tendencies might have offset each other. However, it is also possible that older jobseekers simply do not pay too much attention to such details in job advertisements, knowing that performance is sought after everywhere – as the main effect illustrates. In general, our research does not allow disentangling age and cohort effects. Our age-related finding could be a characteristic of a particular generation and not of older jobseekers in general.
Implications
This study adds to the existing recruitment research that varies different aspects of job advertisements (e. g., Feldman et al., 2006; Gaucher et al., 2011). By combining relationship and recruitment research (Clark & Mills, 2011; Hausknecht et al., 2004), this study advances the knowledge of how people of different ages react to the blending of different relationship norms in the context of recruiting. Our experiments suggest that the promise of communal workplace relationships activates communal relationship norms in jobseekers’ minds, leading them to think less of contingent reciprocation and thus performance aspects than jobseekers who were asked to read a conventional job ad implying exchange norms (Clark& Mills, 1979). Thus, practically speaking, our findings suggest that managers should consider that communal job advertisements do not lead to higher job-choice intentions, while leading to the perception of lower organizational performance standards. Hence, it might not be worthwhile for organizations to use such job advertisements, at least in terms of the dependent variables examined in our study. Nevertheless, managers should foster positive workplace relationships in other ways, for example, by designing work in a way that makes social contact easy. By enhancing workplace relationships, managers contribute to employee well-being (Heaphy & Dutton, 2008), whereas by simply speaking of communal relationships in job advertisements, managers likely promise something that lies beyond their control (i. e., the development of friendships). The mentioning of desirable terms in recruiting materials cannot substitute for working toward the development of a positive organizational culture that is far more encompassing and in-depth than employer branding materials – such a culture comprises shared assumptions and values that develop over a longer period (Schein, 1996). Although we did not find age differences in the reaction to different job advertisements, it might be interesting for managers to know that older adults seem to expect higher organizational performance standards. This finding could help to counteract potential age stereotypes regarding lower performance and aging, which have indeed been refuted (Ng & Feldman, 2008).
Limitations and Future Research
Our results stem from scenario experiments and rely on self-reports. Thus, it would be ideal to replicate our findings in field experiments. Preferably, such a design would also allow testing posthire outcomes such as actual performance and job satisfaction (Rynes, 1991). In further variations of our experiments, respondents could be asked in the lab to process job advertisements more deeply and to think aloud, which would allow a better understanding of why respondents expect lower performance standards. When respondents process job advertisements deeply and think aloud, it could be also worthwhile to vary further employer attributes, to promise age-diverse workplace friendships (Dietz & Fasbender, 2021), and to examine whether the imagery of the term family, after all, differs from the one invoked by the term friendship. For example, Costas (2012) argues that a family culture should carry different connotations (e. g., unity and security) than a friendship culture (e. g., individualism and choice). Moreover, further baseline questions could assess whether respondents differ in advance in terms of their cultural attitudes in general (e. g., Schwartz, 1999) and their experience of different organizational climates (e. g., innovative versus traditional; Baker, 2016; Patterson et al., 2005).
Future research could also test further outcome and moderating variables. Because job advertisements are a form of marketing, it would be interesting to include a measure of corporate reputation as an outcome in future experiments. Even though communal job advertisements do not lead to higher job-choice intentions, they might positively change the organizational reputation. In this context, it could be intriguing to test whether our findings also hold true for nonfictional organizations. Moreover, it could be insightful to include individuals’ preferences for separating or integrating work and private life as a moderating variable (Kreiner, 2006). Finally, it could be meaningful to replicate our experiments in different cultures or in a few years from now – because the term friend is not applied in the same way everywhere (e. g., Fischer, 1982) and the meaning of the term friend could be subject to change since social media seemingly allow befriending to occur with a click of a button (Pillemer & Rothbard, 2018).
Conclusion
How do jobseekers react to job advertisements that promise communal workplace relationships instead of exchange relationships? Findings from two experiments show that such job advertisements do not lead to higher job-choice intentions while leading to the perception of lower organizational performance standards. We tentatively conclude that it might not be in the best interest of an organization to use job advertisements that refer to the concepts of friendship and family. However, we emphasize that managers should strive to foster the development of positive workplace relationships in other ways. Notably, our experiments also revealed that older workers generally expect higher organizational performance standards. This finding could help to counter potential age stereotypes regarding lower performance and aging.
Electronic Supplementary Material
The electronic supplementary material is available with the online version of the article at https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000390
We thank Bettina Eibl, Kyra Göbel, Lisa Hensel, Teresa Müller, Cornelia Niessen, Carina Schröder, and Meike Sons for their feedback and careful reading of the manuscript.
Literatur
(2004). The effects of brand relationship norms on consumer attitudes and behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 87 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1086/383426
(2021, May 5). Niederlassungsleiter (m/w/d) Kältetechnik. Stepstone website. Retrieved from https://www.stepstone.de/stellenangebote-Niederlassungsleiter-m-w-d-Kaeltetechnik-Berlin-Berlin-AirOn-GmbH-7039822-inline.html?suid=bdebeb59-c85b-4934-890a-2bbd0e374d70&rltr=24_24_25_dynrl_m_0_0_0_0_0
(2016). Antecedents and consequences of observing workplace sexual behavior. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31, 265 – 279. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-05-2014-0167
(2008). Psychological contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 143 – 158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.005
(1993). Job postings and the decision to interview: A verbal protocol analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 845 – 856. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.845
(1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497 – 529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
(2015). How “organization” can weaken the norm of reciprocity: The effects of attributions for favors and a calculative mindset. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1, 93 – 113. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2014.0015
(2017, August 9). Job ad: Server. Monster website. Retrieved from http://job-openings.monster.com/Server-Greenwood-IN-US-BJ’s-Restaurants-Inc/31/dcde0773-c35c-40b8-9491-a3e87d54dc4a
(2010). The impact of the wording of employment advertisements on students’ inclination to apply for a job. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150, 485 – 502., https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903365422
(2019). Older workers need not apply? Ageist language in job ads and age discrimination in hiring (Working Paper No. 26552). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26552
(1996). Person-organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 294 – 311. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0081
(1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.
(2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312, 1913 – 1915. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127488
(2008). When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 655 – 684. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.53.4.655
(1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12 – 24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.12
(1993). The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 684 – 691. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167293196003
(2011).
A theory of communal (and exchange) relationships . In P. A. M. van LangeA. W. KruglanskiE. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 232 – 250). Sage.(2007). The interactive effects of recruitment practices and product awareness on jobseekers’ employer knowledge and application behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 180 – 190. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.180
(2012). “We are all friends here”: Reinforcing paradoxes of normative control in a culture of friendship. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21, 377 – 395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492612439104
(2014, November 9). Job ad: Assistant restaurant manager. Monster website. Retrieved from http://jobview.monster.com/Assistant-Restaurant-Manager-Job-Tampa-FL-139233294.aspx?jobPosition=2
(2006). Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: Development and application of a slope difference test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 917 – 926. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.917
(2021). Age-diverse workplace friendship: A systematic literature review and recommendations for future research. Work, Aging and Retirement. Advance online publication https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waab028
(2009). Effects of customization on application decisions and applicant pool characteristics in a web-based recruitment context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 224 – 234. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012832
(2014). Selective narrowing of social networks across adulthood is associated with improved emotional experience in daily life. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38, 195 – 202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413515404
(2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175 – 191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
(2006). Varying the content of job advertisements: The effects of message specificity. Journal of Advertising, 35, 123 – 141. https://doi.org/10.2753/joa0091-3367350108
(1982). What do we mean by ‘friend’? An inductive study. Social Networks, 3, 287 – 306. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(82)90004-1
(2013). Beyond age comparisons: A plea for the use of a modified Brunswikian approach to experimental designs in the study of adult development and aging. Human Development, 56, 351 – 371. https://doi.org/10.1159/000357177
(2011). Evidence that gendered wording in job advertisements exists and sustains gender inequality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 109 – 128. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022530
(2011). Diversity and incivility: Toward an action-oriented approach. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13, 40−53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422311410646
(2012). The impacts of demographic change: Young workers, older workers and the consequences for education, skills and employment. Education + Training, 54, 558−564. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211265602
(2014, September 22). Google careers: How we think about our benefits. Google website. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/about/careers/lifeatgoogle/benefits/
(2007). Friendship versus business in marketing relationships. Journal of Marketing, 71, 121 – 139. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.4.121
(2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57, 639 – 683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00003.x
(2008). Positive social interactions and the human body at work: Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Management Review, 33, 137 – 162. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.27749365
(2007). Gütekriterien einer deutschen Adaptation des transformational leadership inventory (TLI) von Podsakoff [Measurement quality of a German adaptation of the transformational leadership inventory by Podsakoff]. German Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 51, 1 – 15. https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089.51.1.1
(2018).
Managing the aging workforce . In D. S. OnesN. AndersonC. ViswesvaranH. K. Sinangil (Eds.), The Sage handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 396 – 428). Sage.(2004). Effort for payment: A tale of two markets. Psychological Science, 15, 787 – 793. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00757.x
(2019). Having workplace friends is not always fun. German Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (ZAO), 63, 152 – 164. https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000300
(2015). How relationship norms affect consumers’ stance on differential customer treatment. Schmalenbach Business Review, 67, 196 – 225. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03396874
(2007). Patterns of cognitive change over time and relationship to age following successful treatment of Cushing’s disease. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 21 – 29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617707070051
(2020, September 8). Servicemitarbeiter (m/w/d) Hafen Diner. Hotelcareer website. Retrieved from https://www.hotelcareer.at/jobs/hotel-hafen-hamburg-1566/servicemitarbeiter-m-w-d-hafen-diner-2615286?intcid=Recomjob_listing_Pos3_1566_2615286
(1980).
Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles and social support . In P. B. BaltesO. G. Brim Jr. (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 253 – 286). Academic Press.(2006). Consequences of work‐home segmentation or integration: A person‐environment fit perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 485 – 507. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.386
(2005). Taboo trade-offs, relational framing, and the acceptability of exchanges. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, 2 – 15. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1501_2
(2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17, 437 – 455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085
(2013). Associations between cortical thickness and general intelligence in children, adolescents and young adults. Intelligence, 41, 597 – 606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.07.010
(2020, September 8). Digitales Tagespraktikum im IT-Consulting. Mindsquare website. Retrieved from https://mindsquare.de/stellenangebote/digitales-tagespraktikum-it-consulting/
(2017). Mend it or end it: Redirecting the search for interactions in the organizational sciences. Organizational Research Methods, 20, 549 – 573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115625322
(2010). Millennials in the workplace: A communication perspective on millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 225 – 238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9172-7
(2008). The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 392 – 423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.392
(2010). The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 63, 677 – 718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x
(2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: Links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 379 – 408. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.312
(2002). Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of the effectiveness of change management teams: An examination of aversive, directive, transactional, transformational, and empowering leader behaviors. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 172 – 197. https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2699.6.2.172
(2018). Friends without benefits: Understanding the dark sides of workplace friendship. Academy of Management Review, 43, 635 – 660. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0309
(1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107 – 142. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7
(1991).
Recruitment, job choice, and post-hire consequences: A call for new research directions . In M. D. DunnetteL. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 399 – 444). Consulting Psychologists Press.(1996). Culture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 229 – 240. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393715
(1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology, 48, 23 – 47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1999.tb00047.x
(1992). Organizational culture and employee retention. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 1036 – 1056. https://doi.org/10.2307/256539
(1987). Organizational recruitment activities and applicants’ reactions at different stages of the recruitment process. Personnel Psychology, 40, 261 – 285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00604.x
(2014). Fun and friends: The impact of workplace fun and constituent attachment on turnover in a hospitality context. Human Relations, 67, 923 – 946. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713508143
(2012). Diversity cues on recruitment websites: Investigating the effects on jobseekers’ information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 214 – 224. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025847
1We explored gender differences. Data from Study 1 showed no interaction effect, F(2, 285) = 2.31, p = .10, η2 = .02, but a main effect for gender, F(2, 285) = 7.89, p < .001, η2 = .05. Further analyses indicated that women generally reported higher job choice intentions than men (Mfemale = 3.55, SD = .96, Mmale = 3.14, SD = 1.06), F(1, 286) = 11.13, p = .001, η2 = .04. Data from Study 2 revealed no main or interaction effects, F(2, 333) = 2.51, p = .08, η2 = .02 and F(4,666) = 1.57, p = .18, η2 = .01. We also explored three-way interactions, being aware of test power considerations given our sample sizes (e.g., Dawson & Richter, 2006; Murphy & Russell, 2017). In both studies, we did not find joint effects of gender, age, and type of job advertisements on applicant reactions, F(2,283) = 0.85, p = .43, η2 = .01, and F(4,660) = 0.81, p = .52, η2 = .01. We also tested further age cutoffs. We defined older workers as 40 years or above (Ng & Feldman, 2008) and used this cutoff to form groups. Result patterns remained stable in both studies. We did not compare extreme groups to avoid overestimation of effects (Freund & Isaacowitz, 2013).
