...expectations work conditions on newcomer integration behaviour. Based on the theoretical model of multiple socialization, the results suggest that: 1) the degree of exchanges that subjects establish between different areas of their lire influences PSE efficiency; 2) PSE effects can be positive or negative depending on the nature of the disturbances to which PSE is applied.

La investigacion se inscribe en los debates actuales relativos a los efectos del sentimiento de eficacia personal (SEP). Realizada en torno a 157 profesores de escuelas recientemente integrados en su primer puesto de trabajo, la investigacion examina el rol moderador del SEP respecto al impacto de los desfases entre las expectativas y la realidad profesional sobre las conductas de insercion de los sujetos. Basada en el modelo teorico de socializacion pluralista y en un enfoque sistematico de las relaciones que los sujetos instauran entre sus diferentes campos de su vida, la investigacion muestra, de un lado, que el rol moderador del SEP se ejerce solo por los sujetos que presentan un grado mediano de intercambios entre sus campos de vida y, de otro lado, que segun el tipo de desfase, los efectos del SEP sobre las conductas de insercion pueden ser invertidos.

**********

In the current occupational contexts marked by uncertainty and growing individual responsibility, perceived self-efficacy (PSE), defined by Bandura as "people's beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives" (Bandura, 1997: 3), takes on a special connotation. Many studies have examined the determinants of PSE, as well as its effects or even its specific courses of action (Bandura and Locke, 2003). The development of these research avenues and the testing of concurrent hypotheses have been accompanied in scientific debate by several controversies, two of which are particularly noteworthy.

The first is linked to Bandura's own definition of the concept. It contrasts the conceptualization and measure of a general self-efficacy--applicable to regulating a broad variety of situations--with the conceptualization and measure of task specific self-efficacy, directly applied to clearly identified tasks (for this debate, see, for example, Pinquart, Juang and Silbereisen, 2003).

The second controversy, which is more recent (Vancouver, Thompson and Williams, 2001; Vancouver et al., 2002; Bandura and Locke, 2003; Vancouver and Kendall, 2006), proposes that PSE, which had always been considered as a positive resource under any circumstance for adjusting to challenging situations, could have negative effects.

Using research into the problem of integrating newcomers into work organizations, this article proposes: (1) to show how employing a model of multiple and active socialization (Baubion-Broye and Hajjar, 1998; Almudever, Croity-Belz and Hajjar, 1999; le Blanc, Dupuy and Rossi, 2001) can facilitate the adoption of a fresh position in these debates and the testing of new hypotheses concerning PSE efficiency conditions; and (2) to present empirical data examining the role of PSE in regulating the effect of the perceived mismatches between expectations and actual work conditions on how newcomers are integrated.

Different Levels of General Self-Efficacy

Initially developed by Bandura (1997), the first debate concerns the distinction between general self-efficacy, defined as "the belief a subject bas in his capability to act successfully in a variety of challenging situations" (Eden, 1996: 9) and task specific self-efficacy, which reflects a subject's belief in his ability to successfully carry out specific tasks at a specific level of performance (Gardner and Pierce, 1998). The question that arises then is which measurements, general or specific, are the most relevant in predicting a subject's behaviour?

Bandura (1997) chooses the latter. Arguing that "human competency is structured and is expressed in many ways rather than uniformly in various areas of activity" (Bandura, 2003: 69), Bandura specifies that his theory of personal efficacy concerns "the system of efficacy beliefs not as a global characteristic, but as a differentiated set of beliefs in self linked to distinct areas of functioning" (ibid., 62). Saks (1995) proposes this point of view in his measurement scale for newcomers that examines their perceived efficacy in the specific tasks required in their work. Nonetheless, researchers are increasingly interested in the general nature of efficacy beliefs (Yeo and Neal, 2006) and in new tools for measuring it (Chen, Gully and Eden, 2001, 2004). This is because, on the one hand, they consider that the general feeling of efficacy permeates specific situations (Sherer et al., 1982; Sherer and Adams, 1983), and, on the other, that integration and transition situations require greater mobilization of extra-role behaviour (Morrison and Phelps, 1999) and contextual performance (Speier and Frese, 1997), not directly connected to specific tasks.

In literature on the subject, different options have been proposed that transcend the debate between the supporters of task specific self-efficacy measures and those in favour of general self-efficacy measures. One option is to introduce another intermediate level of generalization/specificity. Woodruff and Cashman (1993) distinguish task specific self-efficacy, domain self-efficacy and general self-efficacy. Another option is to jointly consider specific efficacy beliefs and general self-efficacy and to examine the relationship between these two variables (Chen, Gully and Eden, 2004; Yeo and Neal, 2006). We specify our position in this first debate by proposing another interpretation of the problem below.

Negative Effects of Perceived Self-Efficacy?

The second debate concerns the possibility that PSE might have negative effects on subject performance. A lively controversy has been engaged between Bandura (Bandura and Locke, 2003) and Vancouver and his colleagues (Vancouver, Thompson and Williams, 2001; Vancouver et al., 2002; Vancouver and Kendall, 2006). Vancouver and colleagues point to certain negative effects of PSE on subject performance. Using Powers' perceptual control theory (1978, 1991), which posits that it is the mismatch between the goals targeted by the subject and the perceived goal achievement that prompts action, these authors support the idea that a high PSE is likely to have negative effects on subject motivation and performance for one of two reasons: either because subjects reduce the perceived mismatch; or they anticipate rapid goal achievement and thereby ignore the need to mobilize resources.

Bandura and Locke (2003) contest both the premises and results of this research. At the theoretical level, they criticize employing a control theory that only envisages negative feed-back loops and ignores the proactive aspect of anticipatory behaviour in regulating subject behaviour. At the empirical level, they refer to the results of nine meta-analyses which show PSE's functional value.

In the research field of interest to us, namely organizational socialization and the integration of newcomers into work organizations, a number of contrasting results confirm that the effects of PSE on proactive behaviour can vary (see the reviews by Major and Koslowski, 1997 and by Bauer, Morrison and Callister, 1998). By proactive behaviour, we are referring to behaviour demonstrating the newcomers' propensity to participate actively in their socialization process rather than submitting passively to the organization's adaptive influences and "tactics." This behaviour was operationalized in the 1980s through information seeking (Comer, 1991; Miller and Jablin, 1991; Ostroff and Koslowski, 1992; Morrison, 1993a, 1993b; Major and Koslowski, 1997), which involves seeking information through direct inquiry or monitoring, and role orientation (Nicholson, 1984; Jones, 1986), which involves either role innovation or a more conformist adaptation to a prescribed role.

With regard to information seeking, Worchel and Cooper (1976) and Miller and Jablin (1991) demonstrate that the more certain people are of their capabilities, the more they turn towards others to obtain information. The opposite hypothesis is, however, supported by other authors (Koslowski and Ostroff, 1987; Northcraft and Ashford, 1990; Morrison, 1993a, 1993b) who state that subjects with a weak PSE become more involved in seeking information from others.

As for role innovation, the longitudinal study by Jones (1986) is a reference point. This study shows that newcomers with a weak PSE tend to conform to the expected occupational role, while those with a high PSE are more innovative in the personal interpretation of this role.

More recent studies (Crant, 2000) stress the relationship between PSE and other modalities of proactive behaviour: development of "extra-role behaviour" (Organ and Ryan, 1995); activation of "personal initiative" (Frese et al., 1996; Speier and Frese, 1997); propensity to "take charge" of certain extra-role aspects of work (Morrison and Phelps, 1999; Axtell et al., 2000). While this work supports the idea of a direct and positive relation between PSE and innovative behaviour, other work (Speier and Frese, 1997) emphasizes the mediatory and moderating role of PSE in the relationship between certain characteristics of the work situation (control and complexity) and personal initiative.

All of this work confirms the hypothesis that PSE effects can vary. Bandura and Locke agree on this point, affirming that "no psychosocial factor, or any other factor for that matter, ever bears an invariant relation to human behaviour" (Bandura and Locke, 2003: 96). But how do we account for this variability?

THE MODEL OF MULTIPLE AND ACTIVE SOCIALIZATION

The model of multiple and active socialization was...

NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.



More articles from Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations
Labour law/Droit du travail.(Recent Publications/Publications recentes..., September 22, 2007
Human resources management and organizations/Gestion des ressources hu..., September 22, 2007
Sociology of work/Sociologie du travail.(Recent Publications / Publica..., September 22, 2007
Labour economics, employment and social security/Economique du travail..., September 22, 2007
Equity at work/Equite au travail.(Recent Publications/Publications rec..., September 22, 2007

Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.

Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication name or publication date.

About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company analysis or best practices in managing your organization, Goliath can help you meet your business needs.

Our extensive business information databases empower business professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible, authoritative information they need to support their business goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting, company research or defining management best practices - Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.