The Influence of Recruitment Websites on Job-Seeker Perceptions of Organization and Job Fit

The Influence of Recruitment Websites on Job-Seeker Perceptions of Organization and Job Fit

Daniel Eveleth (University of Idaho, Moscow, USA), Robert Stone (University of Idaho, Moscow, USA) and Lori Baker-Eveleth (University of Idaho, Moscow, USA)
Copyright: © 2018 |Pages: 22
DOI: 10.4018/IJTHI.2018100101

Abstract

This article describes how the uses of websites to recruit and communicate with job-seekers is a well-established practice that has been increasing in frequency. How the website functions can influence job-seekers' perceptions of how well they will fit into the organization as well as match the requirements of a specific open position. The primary research question in this article is how job-seekers' fit perceptions obtained from using the recruitment website, influence their website satisfaction and intentions with respect to the organization. To explore this question and others, a theoretical model with corresponding hypotheses was developed. The empirical analysis of the theoretical model used 199 questionnaire responses and structural equation modeling. The findings offer support for the view that the website's content, job-seeker knowledge of the organization, and the job-seeker's social network influence positively perceptions of fit to the organization and the job in meaningful ways.
Article Preview
Top

Literature Review

Fit (PO and PJ)

A job-seeker’s attitudes toward a potential employer, and subsequently, their intentions to revisit the company’s website, apply, accept an offer or to say positive things about the organization to others, for example, are influenced by such factors as information about the company and the jobs, and by perceptions of recruiters’ behaviors and the selection process. Job-seekers value organizations that have a reputation for treating employees fairly and having a culture that values a positive social environment (Rynes, Heneman III & Schwab, 1980); and they value jobs that seem interesting and provide opportunities (Cable, Aiman-Smith, Mulvey & Edwards, 2000; Irving & Meyer, 1994; Turban & Cable, 2003; Uggerslev, Fassina & Kraichy, 2012). Criteria such as a positive social environment, an interesting job or a job that provides opportunities are obviously subjective, and therefore will vary by job-seeker. A job that appears interesting to one job-seeker may not appear interesting to another; a social environment that seems positive to one job-seeker may not seem positive to another. In short, “different types of individuals are attracted to different types of organizations” (Morley, 2007, p. 110). Therefore, it is helpful to assume that many job-seekers use “fit” with a job or with the organization to assess the attractiveness of any organization (Westerman & Cyr, 2004). The attraction–selection–attrition model, in particular, supports the conclusion that job-seekers will be more attracted to organizations if they perceive that the organization’s values match their own values (Aiman-Smith, Bauer, & Cable, 2001; Carless, 2005; Gregory, Meade & Thompson, 2013; Gully, Phillips, Castellano, Han & Kim, 2013), and that perceptions of fit predict job-choice intentions (Cable & Judge, 1996). Based on the aforementioned literature and conclusions, the following hypotheses were formulated as well as noted on the model shown in Figure 1.

  • Hypothesis 1 (H1): The job-seeker’s perceptions of their fit to the organization have significant, positive influences on their behavioral intentions to the organization.

  • Hypothesis 2 (H2): The job-seeker’s perceptions of their fit to the job have significant, positive influences on their behavioral intentions to the organization.

Figure 1.

The theoretical model and hypotheses

IJTHI.2018100101.f01

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Open Access Articles: Forthcoming
Volume 17: 4 Issues (2021): Forthcoming, Available for Pre-Order
Volume 16: 4 Issues (2020): 3 Released, 1 Forthcoming
Volume 15: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 14: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2005)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing