Western Journal of Communication

ISSN: 1057-0314 (Print) 1745-1027 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rwjc20

Memorable messages and newcomer socialization

J. Kevin Barge & David W. Schlueter

To cite this article: J. Kevin Barge & David W. Schlueter (2004) Memorable messages
and newcomer socialization, Western Journal of Communication, 68:3, 233-256, DOI:
10.1080/10570310409374800

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570310409374800

Published online: 06 Jun 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 289

View related articles

Citing articles: 30 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rwjc20

Download by: [Copenhagen University Library] Date: 31 October 2016, At: 15:09
Western Journal of Communication, 68(3) (Summer 2004), 233-256

Memorable Messages and Newcomer

Socialization
J. Kevin Barge
The University of Georgia

David W. Schlueter
Baylor University

A discursive approach to socialization focuses our attention on the way discourse orga-
nizes the individual-organizational relationship. The present study employs the concept
of memorable messages as a way for exploring the discourse associated with organiza-
tional entry. Three results emerged from the data: (1) the discourse associated with the
socialization of newcomers emphasizes simultaneously fitting into existing organiza-
tional patterns while developing individual abilities; (2) informal face-to-face communi-
cation is important when constructing individual-organizational relationships; and (3)
there is a positive bias in the socialization discourse associated with organizational
entry. Implications for future research in organizational entry from a discursive ap-
proach are highlighted.
Key words: discourse, memorable messages, socialization tactics, organizational entry

socialization theorists and researchers agree

M OST ORGANIZATIONAL
that the entry point, or what is typically referred to as the
encounter stage, is a key moment for people as they construct their
relationship with an organization (Hess, 1993; Jablin, 1987; Miller &
Kramer, 1999; Porter, Lawler, & Hackman, 1975). The encounter stage
represents the initial point of entry into the new organization where
newcomers may begin perceiving discrepancies between their precon-
ceptions of the organization, and actual job demands and other orga-
nizational realities (Nicholson & Arnold, 1991). Research exploring the
encounter stage has typically overemphasized the organization's role
in constructing the individual-organizational relationship at the ex-
pense of studying both macro-level ideological influences and margin-
alized jobs that do not fit within the traditional definition of working
for an organization (Clair, 1996).

The authors thank Daniel Canary and the three anonymous reviewers for their assis-
tance with this article.
Correspondence: J. Kevin Barge, Dept. of Speech Communication, 110 Terrell Hall,
University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 (jkbarge@uga.edu).
234 Memorable Messages

In the current study, we continue to focus on organizational jobs, but

we also consider the possibility that macro-level implications of social-
ization can be drawn from studies that emphasize the organization.
Most socialization models begin with the assumption that individuals
and organizations are the analytic starting points, which moves re-
searchers to explain how individuals take on organizational roles (Bul-
lis, 1999). We begin with the assumption that discourse is the analy-
tical starting point, which moves us to explore how newcomers are
constituted by the discursive formations in which they participate and
engage. Adopting a view of socialization through a discursive lens
facilitates examining how cultural discourses about labor may migrate
in and out of organizations and intersect with organization specific and
professional occupational discourses to constitute unique individual-
organizational relationships.
By exploring the message activity of organizational members, we
can examine how messages within organizational life connect with
larger cultural discourses and explain how they create and sustain
particular patterns of individual-organizational relationships. Using
the notion of memorable messages, we explore what kinds of messages
newcomers attune to during organizational entry and how this influ-
ences the way they construct their relationship with an organization.
First, however, a review of existing theory and research regarding
organizational socialization is conducted and a description of the rela-
tionships among memorable messages, discourse, and socialization
follows.
Traditional and Discursive Views Toward Socialization
Several important features characterizing the encounter stage—
change, contrast, and surprise—lead to special sense-making needs
and move organizational newcomers to be highly receptive to messages
(Louis, 1980). During the encounter stage, newcomers are busy devel-
oping work skills and abilities (Feldman, 1981), establishing their
situational identity (Katz, 1980; Wanous, 1980), and making sense of
or attaching meaning to organizational events, practices, and proce-
dures (Louis, 1980). Since newcomers experience uncertainty in their
new surroundings, Jablin (1984, 1987, 2001) concluded that they are
very interested in obtaining as much new information as possible from
others and are most attentive to others' messages during the encounter
stage. These messages are particularly salient to newcomers because
they socialize individuals into the appropriate values, expected behav-
iors, and essential knowledge for effectively performing an organiza-
tional role (Brim & Wheeler, 1966).
One line of organizational entry research has focused on identifying
the tactics organizations use to acculturate newcomers and the impact
they have on newcomer adjustment. Jones (1986) refined the work of
Van Maanen and Schein (1979) by developing a classification system of
Summer 2004 235

six "people processing" strategies that reflect how collective (collective,

formal, sequential, fixed, serial, investiture) or individualized (individ-
ual, informal, random, variable, disjunctive, divestiture) an organiza-
tion's socialization program is for newcomers. Collective tactics pro-
duce a similar set of socialization experiences for newcomers while
individualized tactics create a unique portfolio of acculturation expe-
riences for newcomers.
Newcomers construct different types of roles in their new work
settings given the differential use of these tactics by organizations
(Anakwe & Greenhaus, 1999; Ashford & Black, 1996; Ashford, Saks, &
Lee, 1998; Ashford & Saks, 1996; Cooper-Thomas & Anderson, 2002;
Hart, Miller, & Johnson, 2003). Organizations deploying collective
tactics process newcomers through a structured and common set of
orientation and training experiences which move them to create cus-
todial roles (Jones, 1986). Collective tactics facilitate sense making
since newcomers are able to reduce their uncertainty and role ambi-
guity occasioned by the new work environment. This reduction of
uncertainty is accompanied by heightened amounts of organizational
commitment, communication satisfaction, and feelings of confidence
that newcomers have toward their supervisors (Mignery, Rubin, &
Gorden, 1995). Conversely, organizations that employ individualized
tactics provide a novel set of experiences to newcomers, which lead
members to adopt innovative roles (Jones, 1986). Ashford and Saks
(1996) concluded, "institutionalized socialization appears to promote
attachment to a job and organization, thus promoting a more loyal
workforce; on the other hand, individualized socialization appears to
promote role innovation and superior performance" (p. 170).
A second line of organizational entry research has focused on the
various types of information seeking strategies newcomers perform to
collect much needed information and generate interpretations about
role-related and organizational events (Mignery et al., 1995; Miller,
1996; Miller & Jablin, 1991; Morrison, 1993; Ostroff & Kozlowski,
1992; Wanberg & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2000). Miller and Jablin (1991)
contended that organizational members may select from a wide variety
of tactics such as overt, indirect, third party, testing, disguising con-
versations, observing, and surveillance message strategies to seek
feedback regarding the organizational task as well as personal rela-
tionships among organizational members. The type of strategy that a
newcomer selects depends on the social cost associated with seeking
the information. For example, when the social cost of seeking informa-
tion is high, newcomers are more likely to use more covert tactics such
as observation than overt tactics such as asking a direct question
(Miller, 1996).
Models of socialization rooted in discursive practice have two dis-
tinct foci that differentiate them from traditional models of socializa-
tion grounded in an information transfer model of communication.
236 Memorable Messages

First, exploring how communicative practice constitutes the individ-

ual-organizational relationship is foregrounded. Even though the early
work by Van Maanen and Schein (1979), and continued by Jones
(1986), explored the construction of the individual-organizational re-
lationship in terms of custodial and innovative roles, the focus of their
research was on how organizations construct socialization activities to
process people and not the individual message activity or discourse of
socialization. We do not deny that a model of socialization grounded in
an information transfer model of communication provides an account
of the kinds of role relationships individuals may construct with orga-
nizations. Our argument is that the focus on relational development
within traditional socialization models is of secondary importance and
represents only one of many socialization outcomes including length of
tenure, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Adopting a
discursive view toward socialization emphasizes the reflexive relation-
ships among communicative practice, identities, and relationships.
McPhee and Zaug (2000) observed that organizations are constituted
through a dynamic interweaving of communication flows, which sug-
gests the kinds of identities and relationships individuals form as they
become socialized during entry depends on how different communica-
tion flows intersect as competing discourses unfold and evolve.
Second, the notion of tactic shifts when we adopt a discursive lens
toward socialization. Within the socialization literature, tactics are
typically viewed as what organizations do to socialize newcomers and
can be differentiated according to either the content of the information
that is provided to the newcomer or the contexts in which the infor-
mation is delivered. The former is represented by Chao, O'Leary-Kelly,
Wolf, Klein, and Gardner's (1994) conceptualization of socialization in
terms of the contents of socialization, the topics and areas in which
organizational members must become knowledgeable if they are to
become acculturated into the organization. Similarly, Jones (1986)
distinguished among different kinds of content-based socialization tac-
tics such as fixed/random, sequential/variable, and investiture/dives-
titure. However, he also identifies a set of socialization tactics such
collective/individual, formal/informal, and serial/disjunctive that re-
flect a context-based approach by distinguishing among the situations
in which the organization transfers information to the newcomer.
From a discursive point of view, socialization tactics also refer to the
ways that discourse organizes the kinds of relationships and identities
individuals establish with the organization. Discourse not only struc-
tures expectations for what kinds of messages should be performed,
when, and in what context, it also structures expectations for the kinds
of identities and relationships individuals should form with the orga-
nization and other organizational members. As Bateson (1972) pointed
out, messages carry information at two levels, report and command,
meaning that messages do more than simply relay content. They also
Summer 2004 237
communicate an injunction for the kinds of relationships individuals
should form with the organization and each other.
Although no research has explicitly looked at the connection be-
tween relational injunctions and socialization discourse, two types of
relational injunctions seem highly salient based on the existing liter-
ature. First, discourse may encourage individuals to become socialized
into existing relational patterns or to individualize their role within
the organization. Drawing on the classic formula for organizational
assimilation, "Organizational Assimilation = Socialization + Individ-
ualization" (Smith & Turner, 1995), both the individualization litera-
ture (Jablin, 2001; Lawler & Finegold, 2000; Porter, Lawler, & Hack-
man, 1975; Schein, 1971) and Jones' (1986) work on role orientation1
make a key distinction between socialization and individualization.
As a result, one type of relational injunction centers on whether the
discourse reflects a socialization focus that reaffirms existing working
relationships and moves newcomers to cultivate custodial roles or
reflects individualization by encouraging newcomers to take risks,
create new ways of working, and adopt innovative roles.
Second, discourse may encourage organizational members to focus
attention on the rational task-oriented or emotional people-oriented
dimensions of organizational relationships. The socialization litera-
ture regarding information seeking (Miller & Jablin, 1991) as well as
more general discussions of group and organizational communication
(Mumby & Putnam, 1992; Poole, 1999) distinguishes between task and
personal dimensions of relationships. Relational injunctions that re-
flect the former would emphasize the importance of performing work in
rational and efficient ways. Relational injunctions that reflect the
latter would emphasize the importance of developing good working
relationships with other employees that pay attention to the needs of
self and other. Whether newcomers create relationships that empha-
size achieving tasks rationally or developing good working relation-
ships depends on the socialization discourses they engage during
entry.
Memorable Messages, Discourse, and Socialization
A discursive approach toward socialization during organizational
entry focuses our attention on the way communication constitutes the
individual-organizational relationship. Discourses are embedded with
assumptions regarding who can speak, about what, when, through
what medium, and with what intent that structure a set of obligations
and opportunities for the performance of relationships and identities
for organizational newcomers as they enter the organization. Although
several different analytical strategies are available for discourse anal-
ysis (Putnam & Fairhurst, 2001), the notion of memorable messages
seems well suited to the study of socialization given its emphasis on
message activity and its use in previous socialization research.
238 Memorable Messages

Stohl (1986) defined a memorable message as a message that indi-

viduals remember for a long period of time that had a major influence
on their life. Memorable messages tend to be short discursive units
that articulate behavioral injunctions through the use of such linguis-
tic devices as proverbs, colloquialisms, and "rules of thumb." Knapp,
Stohl, and Reardon (1981) found memorable messages to be a rich
source of information about self-perceptions and the way in which
people communicate and socialize. Stohl (1986) argued that memora-
ble messages: (1) provide information regarding the norms, values,
expectations, rules, requirements, and rationality of the organizational
culture which provides organizational members sense-making struc-
tures to understand and guide organizational behavior; (2) provide
information about the specific enculturation performances by articu-
lating the circumstances surrounding their enactment; (3) provide
information regarding the importance of social network linkages on
organizational socialization; and (4) demonstrate the importance of
employee informal communication with higher levels of the organiza-
tional staff. Studying memorable messages provides a glimpse into the
individual message activity that organizational newcomers find useful
as they enter an organization.
Using memorable messages to explore the discourse associated with
organizational entry makes sense for two reasons. First, memorable
messages transcend the container metaphor of organizations as they
may come from individuals and groups inside and outside the organi-
zation. Clair (1996, 1999) as well as Smith and Turner (1995) argued
that organizational socialization research has been based on the notion
of the container metaphor; the organization serves as a container into
which individuals must be assimilated. The result is that much social-
ization research has focused on the explicit tactics organizations use to
assimilate employees. If we start from the notion that socialization is
a discursive activity, our starting point is articulating the kinds of
messages that influence how individuals structure their relationship
and identity with the organization. Rather than be confined to message
activity that is solely produced by other organizational members, em-
ploying the notion of memorable messages focuses our analysis on the
socialization discourse that may be created and sustained by individ-
uals and groups within or outside the organization.
Second, memorable messages provide a glimpse into the overall
grammar for meaning and action associated with organizational entry.
Wittgenstein (1953) coined the phrase, "A drop of grammar in an ocean
of meaning," which means that even the smallest discursive unit is
connected to a larger set of grammatical rules that facilitate people
making sense of their experience and initiating action. For example,
Stohl's (1986) finding that an important memorable message during
socialization, "It's one big family here," suggests certain ideas about
the importance of collaboration and personal relationships within the
Summer 2004 239
organization. Moreover, we can gain an insight into the discourse of
socialization by exploring the contextual features regarding the per-
formance of the message. Stohl (1986) contended, "the socializing and
memorable nature of the messages were enhanced by several recurrent
features in their form and structure, the receptivity of the respondent,
the content, and the context" (p. 232, emphasis added). For example,
Stohl's (1986) finding that the majority of memorable messages were
received from an individual in the same work area that was seen on a
daily basis suggests that the discourse of socialization within this firm
emphasized the importance of experienced persons with local knowl-
edge in the socialization process.
By examining the memorable messages during the socialization of
new hires, the role that discourse plays in organizational entry can be
directly examined. A thorough examination of the discursive features
moves us to explore not only the content of memorable messages, but
also the circumstances in which they occur as well as the socialization
strategies they embody. This line of reasoning prompts three research
questions:
RQl: What are the message content and functions of organizational newcomers'
memorable messages?
RQ2: What are the contextual characteristics of the newcomers' memorable messages?
RQ3: What is the relationship between socialization tactics and the message content
and functions of newcomers' memorable messages?

Method
Participants
A sample of organizational newcomers was obtained using a net-
work sampling technique (Frey, Botan, & Kreps, 2000). Undergradu-
ate communication students contacted individuals they knew to be
organizational newcomers and received extra credit for their partici-
pation. To be considered for the study, participants had to have been in
the current organization less than two years.2 106 respondents com-
pleted the survey. Of the 106 respondents, 62 were male (58.5%) and
44 were female (41.5%). Respondent age ranged from 20 to 55 years
with a mean age of 24.9 years. 84.9% of the participants were recent
college graduates employed in their first job with the remaining par-
ticipants having worked on average 2.6 jobs prior to their current
position. Participants indicated how many months they had been in
their current position to confirm they were in fact newcomers. Replies
ranged from one to 24 months with participants serving on average
almost eight months in their current position (M = 7.93).
Measurement
The study employed a field-descriptive methodology utilizing a self-
administered survey. The following key concepts were of interest.
240 Memorable Messages

Content, functions, and contextual characteristics of messages.

Participants were asked to describe in detail a single memorable
message that made an impact on their work life when they first
entered the organization. In the cover letter accompanying the
survey, a memorable message based on Stohl's (1986) conceptualiza-
tion was described as being, "a 'piece of advice' or some 'words of
wisdom' you received. In fact, the message may have influenced how
you behaved at work, the expectations you created for the
organization, or the career decisions you made." Three sample
messages regarding showing up to work on time, keeping one's
personal and professional lives separate, and expectations by one's
supervisor were included in the participant cover letter.3 After
reading the cover letter, participants then recalled and wrote a
memorable message. After describing the memorable message, they
explained how they used this message in their organizational life. To
measure the confidence participants had for their recall of the
memorable message, they completed five seven-point semantic
differential scales (agree/disagree; true/false; correct/incorrect;
right/wrong; yes/no). The five scales were highly reliable (Cronbach's
alpha = .98) and were subsequently summed. The mean response
for the summed items was 31.58, which indicated that participants
felt confident in their recollection of the message's wording.
Two coders content analyzed the participants' responses to the
two open-ended questions that asked participants to: (a) recollect a
memorable message, and (b) explain how they used this in their
organizational life. First, each coder was given the memorable
message provided by each subject (n = 106). Second, each coder
independently clustered the memorable messages into categories
using an inductive method, which is commonly used with qualitative
data (Taylor & Trujillo, 2001). We felt it was important to employ an
inductive strategy given that most research in newcomer
socialization does not examine either the content or function of
message activity. Third, the coders met and discussed the categories
that each inductively had developed. Duplicate categories were
eliminated and a master category system was finalized for types of
memorable messages. The researchers then provided each coder with
this finalized list along with explicit descriptions that defined each
category and the two coders categorized the messages using the
master category system. Using Cohen's Kappa, the reliability
coefficient for the first open-ended question was .87. Coders then
resolved any discrepancies. The same process was repeated for the
second open-ended question yielding an intercoder reliability of .92.
Participants also reported the contextual characteristics of the
message. From a discursive point of view, it is important to assess
who has a right to talk, about what, when, and through what
medium if one is to discern what expectations surround how the
Summer 2004 241
messages are to be performed. Participants provided the following
types of information: (a) when the message was received; (b) the
organizational position of message source; (c) the gender of the
message source; (d) intent of the message; (e) whether the message
was presented in a formal or informal context; and (f) the medium
that was used to give the memorable message.
Socialization tactics. Socialization tactics were measured using
the memorable message's linguistic content as a basis for the kinds
of individual-organizational relationships that were emphasized.
Messages were coded according to whether or not the message
suggested that the individual-organizational relationship should
emphasize socialization or individualization and rationality or
emotionality. Socialization/individualization was coded for two
features. First, each message was coded for whether it reflected a
system or individual focus. Socialization emphasizes individual
recognizing and fitting into the existing network of organizational
relationships while individualization focuses more on the
individual's unique set of needs and desires. Memorable messages
were coded as having either (a) system focus—messages that
emphasized newcomers understanding and fitting into the existing
set of working relationships in the organization, (b) individual
focus—messages that encouraged newcomers to focus on self
development by elaborating their own personal skill sets or meeting
their personal needs, (c) messages that emphasized both a system
and individual focus, or (d) this focus was not present in the
message.
Second, each message was coded for the degree to which it
reflected an individual being encouraged to adopt a custodial or
innovative role orientation (Jones, 1986). Socialization encourages
people to preserve the organizational status quo while individualiza-
tion encourages people to develop new create ways of working and
take risks. The memorable messages were coded as either (a)
custodial role—messages that emphasized fitting in with and sup-
porting the existing organizational rules, values, and procedures, (b)
innovative role—messages that urged newcomers to stand out, be
creative, take risks, and personalize one's work environment, (c)
messages that emphasized both a custodial or innovative orienta-
tion, or (d) this focus was not present in the message.
Finally, each memorable message was coded in terms of its
encouraging individuals to focus on the more rational and task-
oriented dimension of organizational relationships or the more
emotional and people-oriented dimension. The memorable messages
were coded as either (a) emphasizing rationality—messages that told
the newcomer to perform work in an efficient and organized manner,
(b) emphasizing emotionality—messages that highlighted developing
good working relationships and paying attention to self and other's
242 Memorable Messages

personal attitudes and needs, (c) messages that emphasized both

rationality and emotionality, or (d) this focus was not present in the
message.
Two coders were trained in the above system and coded the 106
memorable messages. Both the memorable message provided by
participants and their explanation of how they used it in their work
life were used to assign the code. Using Cohen's Kappa, the
intercoder reliabilities were as follows: system/individual focus (.80),
custodial/innovative focus (.72), and rationality/emotionality focus
(.78).
Results
Research Question #1: Content and Functions of Memorable
Messages
Message Content. The following content categories for memorable
messages were derived from the data for the first open-ended
question. Specific examples of each theme and their percentage of
the total number of messages for each category is presented in Table 1.
Themes are listed in descending order of frequency.
1. Professional behavior (n = 34). Messages in this category told the
newcomer how to act professionally within a work context. These
messages tended to be short maxims or proverbs that highlighted
what it meant to act "professionally" and reflected tacit knowledge
of what it meant to be a professional.
2. Work expectations and rules {n = 20). These types of messages
reflected basic, sometimes "unwritten" codes of how to act or how an
employee should perform their work. This category included high-
lighting expectations regarding time management, how to act with
one's supervisor, and how to treat other employees.
3. Work ethic (n = 12). Messages in this category were proverbial
statements that emphasized the importance and value of hard
work. This category explicitly highlighted that rewards, in the form
of increased salary and status, were associated with hard work.
4. Office politics (n = 11). Messages in this category alerted the
newcomer to the importance of office politics—who to pay attention
to, who had power, and how to ingratiate oneself with others.
5. Customer service (n = 9). These messages emphasized the impor-
tance of pleasing customers and delivering high-quality service to
clients.
6. Welcome to the team (n = 7). Messages characterizing this category
centered on newcomers becoming aware of how glad the organiza-
tion was to have the individuals join the company and that "we are
all in this together." Many of the messages explicitly referenced the
metaphor of "family" and emphasized that newcomers should feel
they were part of the organizational family.
Summer 2004 243

TABLE 1
Content of Memorable Messages
Percent
Theme Frequency of Total Example
Professional behavior 34 32.1 "Always have a positive
attitude."
"Think before you speak."
Work expectations and 20 18.9 "When I first started the job, my
rules boss advised me not to call in
sick before major holidays."
"Since I have only been in the
workforce since September, I
can only tell you that the 'Be
punctual' phrase has been the
most significant."
Work ethic 12 11.3 "Always push the envelop. Never
settle for mediocrity."
"You don't get to the top of the
mountain without hard work."
Office politics 11 10.4 "Take good care of what the
owner needs done and keep
his wife happy."
"When I first entered XYZ
company," I was told that I
'should always be nice to
Nadine.' Nadine was my
supervisor's administrative
assistant. She had the 'keys'
to my supervisor."
Customer service 9 8.5 "When I first started working at
my new job right out of
college, my boss told me that
the customer was always
right. I was in sales."
"Never talk down to parents.
Always be yourself. Never act
like you are better than
them." (from a teacher)
Welcome to the team 7 6.6 "Welcome to our office. You are
an important asset to our
company."
"It's one big family here."
You are valued 7 6.6 "You could do great things if you
wanted to."
"We believe in you."
Giving input 4 3.8 "Don't be afraid to share your
ideas."
"Don't be afraid to speak up or
share an opinion, thought, or
idea."
Other 2 1.9
244 Memorable Messages

7. You are valued (n = 7). These messages emphasized the value of

the newcomer to the organization. Such messages referred to the
faith and belief or organizational members that the newcomer could
make a significant contribution to the company.
8. Giving input (n = 4). These types of messages reflected the impor-
tance of sharing one's insight and thinking about situations to other
organizational members. This category included messages such as
talking openly and honestly about ones' work ideas, speaking up in
meetings, and taking a risk by sharing one's ideas.
Message Function. The following describes the typology for the
functions of memorable messages. Illustrative examples of each
category and their percentage of the total number of messages for
each category are presented in Table 2. Functions are listed in
descending order of frequency.
1. Fostered personal abilities and growth (n = 27). These were devel-
opmental messages that facilitated newcomers elaborating their
personal skills and abilities. Newcomers developed new ways of
working as a result of receiving this message.
2. Do your best (n = 18). These messages encouraged the newcomer to
take initiative, do their best, work harder, pitch in, or pay their
dues. These messages reflected the need to be motivated in one's
work and to preserve and "stick out" tough times.
3. Be organized (n = 16). These messages reminded newcomers about
what goals and priorities needed to be emphasized in their working
lives. Such messages helped them clarify how the goals and prior-
ities fit into the "big picture" and suggested strategies for achieving
them in a timely fashion.
4. Be positive and have fun (n = 13). These messages encouraged the
newcomer to be "happy" in their work. Some of the newcomers
described the function of these messages as decreasing stress by
making the work more fun and enjoyable and providing freedom to
do work the way they wanted.
5. Reinforced company expectations (n. = 12). The messages reminded
newcomers of their job duties and responsibilities to other employ-
ees in the workplace. These messages moved employees to assess
their performance in relation to company goals.
6. Promoted customer service (n = 7). Messages classified in this
category emphasized providing high-quality services and products
to customers.
7. Prompted reflection on the work process (n = 6). These messages
encouraged newcomers to take a moment and explore the assump-
tions and thinking that informed their work situation.
Summer 2004 245

TABLE 2
Function of Memorable Messages

' Percent
Function Frequency of Total Example
Fostered personal 27 25.5 "It freed me to follow my desires
abilities and growth and pushed me to be original in
my business life, as well as my
personal life. Ultimately, I am
leaving my company to follow my
true passion."
"It helped me to learn to be a
problem solver. Always be
responsible to fulfill my
obligations."
Do your best 18 17.0 "It helped me press on, determined
to succeed."
"It allowed me to keep up my
confidence and continue to do the
best job I could."
Be organized 16 15.1 "Prioritize my schedule."
"I touch everything on my "hit list'
every day. I don't let one thing
derail the entire day. It's allowed
me to very multi-task oriented
and very productive."
Be positive and have 13 12.3 "It allowed me to be happy and have
fun fun."
"It made me realize that I was
always going to be overwhelmed
but I had to work through it a
piece at a time."
Reinforced company . 12 11.3 "Make sure that everything is in
expectations line and done correctly."
"At first, I never worried about
being exactly on time, but my boss
ended up holding a meeting a
month later and reprimanded us
for not being at work on time."
Promoted customer 7 6.6 "Made me realize that a university
service is still a working organization
that has responsibilities to
constituents."
"Expect perfection so the customer
won't have reason to complain."
Prompted reflection on 6 5.7 "Allowed me to always analyze what
the work process impacts certain decisions would
have."
"It made me look carefully at his
motives and to also be aware of
the problems in the organization."
Other 7 6.6
246 Memorable Messages

Research Question #2: Contextual Characteristics of Memorable

Messages
Analysis of the contextual characteristics of the memorable mes-
sages are presented in Table 3. Newcomers received their memorable
message early on during the encounter stage as evidenced by 87.7% of
the memorable messages being received no later than the end of the
first month of employment. The dominant source for memorable mes-
sages were organizational members with a "staff' position such as a
trainer or manager (50.9%) followed by co-workers who had been in the
organization longer than the new hire (28.3%). Persons outside the
organization (8.5%) provided relatively few memorable messages and
no peers were identified as the source of the memorable message. The
gender of the message source was overwhelmingly male (Male =
71.7%, Female = 28.3%).
Consistent with Stohl's (1986) findings, an overwhelming percent-
age of the new hires perceived the intent of the message as benevolent
(82.1%). Although 63.2% of the respondents stated that they received
the message during a informal conversation or dialogue, 25.5% re-
ported receiving the memorable message in formal orientation or train-
ing with 9.4% stating they received the message during the employ-
ment interview. The dominant medium for transmitting a memorable
message was face-to-face communication in the form of interpersonal
communication or team meetings (92.5%) as opposed to mediated
communication in the form of a telephone call, voice mail, or email
(2.8%).

Research Question #3: Memorable Messages and Socialization

Strategies
We computed a series of chi-squares that compared message content
and function with the three socialization strategies. Significant chi-
squares emerged for all three strategies in the analysis of message
content (System/individual focus: x 2 (14) = 51.48, p < .0001; Inno-
vative/custodial orientation: x 2 (7) = 46.82, p < .0001; Rationality/
emotionality focus: x 2 (14) = 47.87, p < .0001). Table 4 reports the
distribution. The memorable messages emphasized individuals creat-
ing identities and relationships that maintained an individual focus
(Individual = 59.2%, System = 37.9%) and stressed fitting in to the
existing organizational culture (Custodial = 91%, Innovative = 9%).
Interestingly, memorable messages reflected similar levels of rational-
ity (49.5%) and emotionality (48.5%).
Only one significant chi-square emerged for the relationship be-
tween message function and the three socialization tactics. A statisti-
cally significant finding emerged for system/individual focus and the
distribution is reported in Table 5 (x2 (12) = 22.45, p < .05). Mes-
sages that functioned to prompt reflection on the work process, foster
Summer 2004 247

TABLE 3
Contextual Characteristics of Memorable Messages

Characteristics Frequency Percentage

1. When was the message received?
On the first day of work 24 22.6%
Not on first day, but within first week 42 39.6%
Not within first week, but in first month 19 17.9%
Between 2nd & 4th month 13 12.3%
Before position 8 7.5%
2. What was the position of the message source?
Peer who joined at the same time 0 0.0%
"Staff" member (manager, trainer, etc.) 54 50.9%
Co-worker who had been there longer 30 28.3%
Outsider 9 8.5%
Owner of business 6 5.7%
High status executive (CEO, senior partner) 4 3.8%
University professor 3 2.8%
3. What was the gender of the message source?
Male 76 71.7%
Female 30 28.3%
4. What was the intent of the message?
Benevolent—for my good 87 82.1%
Impersonal—no intention 8 7.5%
Selfish—for the good of the source 3 2.8%
To benefit both the organization and newcomer 4 3.7%
To mentor newcomer 3 2.8%
To make the business successful 1 1.1%
5. What was the setting of the message?
Formal orientation/training 27 25.5%
Informal conversation or dialogue 67 63.2%
Employment interview 10 9.4%
Before joining the company 2 1.9%
6. What was the composition of the dyad—gender of
source to gender or receiver?
Male to male 54 50.9%
Male to female 22 20.8%
Female to male 8 7.5%
Female to female 22 20.8%
7. What communication medium was used to send the
message?
Formal written document 3 2.8%
Informal written document 2 1.9%
Telephone or voice mail 1 .9%
Electronic mail 2 1.9%
Face-to-face communication 98 92.5%
8. Did you enter the organization alone or with others?
Alone 64 60.4%
With others 42 39.4%
248 Memorable Messages

TABLE 4
Message Content by Socialization Tactica

System/Individ. Focus CustTInnov. Focus RationVEmot. Focus

Message Theme System Individ. Both Cust. Emot. Both Ration. Emot. Both
Professional
behavior 4 30 0 31 1 19 14 0
Work expectations
& rules 11 7 1 19 0 16 2 0
Work Ethic 1 10 1 11 1 10 1 1
Office politics 8 3 0 9 2 1 10 0
Customer service 7 2 0 9 0 2 6 1
Welcome to the
team 7 0 0 7 0 1 6 0
You are valued 0 6 1 5 1 0 7 0
Giving input 1 3 0 0 4 1 3 0
Column Totals 39 61 3 91 9 50 49 2

"For Custodial/Innovation, no message was coded as emphasizing both a custodial and

innovation role orientation.

personal abilities and growth, urged newcomers to be organized, and

emphasized "do your best" tended to be associated with individual
strategies. Messages that promoted customer service and reinforced
company expectations were associated with a system focus. Messages
that encouraged newcomers to "be positive and have fun" were equally
reflected in system/individual strategies.

TABLE 5
Message Function by Socialization Tactic

System/Individual Focus
Message Function System Focus Individual Focus Both
Fostered personal abilities and growth 7 19 0
Do your best 5 11 2
Be organized 3 13 0
Be positive and have fun 6 6 1
Reinforced company expectations 9 3 0
Promoted customer service 5 2 0
Prompted reflection on the work process 2 4 0
Column totals: 37 58 3

Discussion
The present study approached the issue of organizational entry
through a discursive perspective. Our reading of the results suggests
three conclusions regarding the discursive constitution of organiza-
tional entry.
Summer 2004 249

First, the discourse associated with the socialization of newcomers

emphasizes simultaneously "fitting into" existing organizational pat-
terns while developing individual abilities. The coding for message
tactics demonstrated an overwhelming emphasis on adopting custodial
than innovative roles while simultaneously emphasizing the impor-
tance of building one's own personal skill sets and meeting personal
needs in stead of fitting into existing working relationships. This same
pattern can also be seen in the analysis of the message content and
functions. Much of the message content, such as welcome to the team,
office politics, proving high quality customer service, work expecta-
tions and rules, and professional behavior emphasizes being welcomed
into the organization and learning the ropes associated with existing
communication patterns. The message content of this study parallels
Chao et al.'s (1994) earlier finding that knowledge regarding perfor-
mance proficiency, politics, and people is important to the socialization
process. However, the present analysis extended Chao et al.'s (1994)
earlier work by examining the functions the message served which
pointed to the importance of individualizing one's performance by
standing out in the organization. Although 17% of the messages such
as promoted customer service and reinforced company expectations
emphasized fitting in, the majority of memorable messages (76%)
functioned to position the individual to stand out in the organization by
building one's personal abilities, doing one's best, being organized,
developing a positive mental outlook, and reflecting on the work pro-
cesses.
This finding suggests that a crucial tension exists for organizational
newcomers to manage the conflicting requirements of the need to fit
into the organization and be "just like everybody else" while at the
same time trying to stand out and be noticed. As Ziller (1964) indi-
cated, most individuals enter an organization as a group and the only
thing that stands out about individuals is the fact that they are new.
Given that the majority of individuals in the present study entered the
organization with others (60.40%), one possibility for managing this
tension is for them to individualize their performance by working
harder and acting more professionally than their colleagues. In a
paradoxical manner, the way to stand out is by doing what everyone
else is doing but to do more of it and do it better. This route allows
newcomers to fit into the organization while simultaneously distin-
guishing themselves from other newcomers. In light of Clair's (1996)
analysis where she suggested one of the dominant themes organizing
discourse in socialization is capitalism, the results suggest that the
discourse surrounding organizational entry constructs individual-or-
ganizational relationships that privilege the organization's interests
and subordinates the interests of newcomers by encouraging them to
compete against one another in the service of fitting into the organi-
zation.
250 Memorable Messages

Given this interpretation, future research needs to focus on the

tension between socialization and individualization. Several research-
ers have observed that socialization and individualization have an
interactive relationship making it important to explore how individu-
als, organizations, and societies manage the competing set of expecta-
tions each activity entails (Kramer & Miller, 1999; Smith & Turner,
1995; Turner, 1999). Moreover, if we begin to view socialization and
individualization as competing discourses for organizing individual-
organizational relationships, it becomes important to examine how the
connection between socialization and individualization unfolds in dif-
ferent places at varied points in time. For example, one way to inter-
pret the current data is that socialization serves as the dominant
discourse and provides a frame for individualization. Yet, other occu-
pational groups may cultivate differing expectations for performance.
As a result, in certain occupations that emphasize creativity and
innovation such as marketing, research and development, or advertis-
ing, individualization may become the dominant discourse during or-
ganizational entry and serve as a frame for socialization discourses.
When socialization is viewed in the context of individualization, this
may lead newcomers to co-create innovative role relationships with
other organizational members that disrupt the organizational status
quo. Exploring how socialization and individualization connect,
whether one serves as a dominant context for framing the other, or
whether they maintain a constructive tension where neither predom-
inates, requires further study.
Second, the discourse of socialization associated with organizational
entry emphasizes informal face-to-face communication when con-
structing individual-organizational relationships. This finding paral-
lels Stohl's (1986) initial study where she found the majority of mem-
orable messages were given in private informal settings. She argued
the personal private address to employees made the message memo-
rable because it was perceived as being purposefully directed and
attuned to the individual. This emphasis on face-to-face communica-
tion seems odd as organizations are increasingly using technology in
the form of email, computer-based training, and orientation videos as
a means of socializing organizational newcomers (Galvin, 2000). This
finding is particularly surprising because email messages can be tai-
lored to the specific person and kept private. Nevertheless, in the
current study only 1.9% of messages were sent using email.
The power of informal face-to-face communication over mediated
forms of communication makes sense when one considers that organi-
zational entry is a highly equivocal event. As media richness (Daft &
Lengel, 1986; Lengel & Daft, 1988) and sense making theory (Weick,
1979; 1995) contend, complex and equivocal events require richer and
more extended forms of communicative practice. From the perspective
of media richness theory, the finding that most memorable messages
Summer 2004 251
are performed during informal face-to-face conversations makes sense
because newcomers need to use richer media such as face-to-face
communication that allow for the synchronous dynamic exchange of
messages through multiple channels among interlocutors than less
rich media such as email during organizational entry. From a sense
making perspective, the importance of messages exchange processes
during equivocal events such as entry requires examining the unfold-
ing message process among newcomers and other organizational mem-
bers. The present study, however, only examined a discrete message
regarding socialization and the context surrounding its performance as
opposed to exploring the joint construction of memorable messages in
conversational practice as it occurs over time. Future research should
investigate the episodic form of communication co-created by newcom-
ers and others that is associated with the performance of memorable
messages.
The finding that informal face-to-face communication is important
during organizational entry also emphasizes the significance of explor-
ing relational development from the perspective of both the individual
and the organization. Most of the socialization research from the
traditional perspective has emphasized the importance of uncertainty
reduction. For example, Miller and Jablin (1991) framed their infor-
mation acquisition strategies from an uncertainty reduction process.
Similarly, the notion behind most formal orientation programs is to
reduce the uncertainty of newcomers regarding organizational and
work expectations (Jerris, 1993). Both lines of research presume that
relationships among the newcomers and organizational members al-
ready exist and that they simply need to calculate the most efficient
and safe way to obtain information to reduce uncertainty. When we
shift to a more discursive approach to organizational entry and recog-
nize that the primary way individuals construct their relationship with
an organization is through informal face-to-face communication, it
becomes important to examine how such informal relationships come
to be created. From an individual perspective, this suggests that future
research may need to focus on how individuals develop and sustain
relationships with others in organizational life. The issue is not
how they seek information based on their calculation of the costs
and rewards inherent within a web of already existing relationships,
but how they use communication to shape these emerging relation-
ships.
Third, there is an overwhelming positive bias in the socialization
discourse associated with organizational entry. While it is possible for
memorable messages to emphasize positive or negative aspects of
organizational life, in this study memorable messages emphasized the
good things in organizations as opposed to the bad. For example, the
content theme of office politics constituted only 10% of sample and
roughly 91% of the participants perceived the source's intent as bene-
252 Memorable Messages

volent. The fact that messages function in a positive manner to assim-

ilate the newcomer should be expected because several theorists con-
tend that during the encounter stage, the organization is particularly
interested in molding the new recruit into the ideal employee (Jones,
1986; Jablin, 2001, 1984; Stohl, 1986). As a result, organizations are
particularly interested in providing positive supportive messages that
help the newcomer better understand the rules, expectations, and
culture of their new work place (Gildsford, 1998). Moreover, we would
speculate that one of the strong stories for organizational newcomers is
a story of how badly they want to make the job work. It is not surpris-
ing, therefore, that the discourse constituting organizational entry
tends to serve a positive function given the confluence of organizational
and newcomer needs. Future research should examine how socializa-
tion discourse changes over time. As the tenure of organizational
members increases, memorable messages that are more negative may
become more salient as they make organizational members aware of
problems and constraints associated with the organization. How so-
cialization discourses construct longer-term organizational members
and what positive and negative features of work life become fore-
grounded and backgrounded in organizational member's experience is
warranted.
A key limitation to the present study is the sampling technique. Our
primary concern was to be able to generalize to newcomers, so a
network sampling technique made sense as it tapped into people from
a variety of organizations and industries. At the same time, this may
limit our ability to replicate our findings. Moreover, the use of a
network sampling strategy limits our ability to explore situated con-
textual aspects of socialization that may be unique to a particular
organization or profession. We recognize that socialization has a con-
textual element to it as different types of organizations and occupa-
tional groups may have different cultures, each generating distinct
discourses that constitute the socialization experience. For example,
Goodman, Ravlin, and Schminke (1987) argued that gaining clarity
about the nature of an employee's work is vital to understanding
organizational data. Understanding the nature of an employee's work
would not only help us analyze the different occupational discourses
constituting socialization, but would also help us explore how contex-
tual characteristics such as the nature of work influence the recall of
memorable messages. As a result, future research should also examine
the discourses of organizational entry associated with differing orga-
nizational types and occupational groupings to explore the similarities
and differences among them.
This study explored how discourse facilitated socializing organiza-
tional newcomers. The use of memorable messages as an analytical
tool provides an opportunity to identify the conversational resources
that are important to newcomers, and the meaningful pieces of advice
Summer 2004 253
they discern from these resources. Given that organizational socializa-
tion is a communicative activity, the current study points to the need
for researchers to continue to examine the conversational practices
that create and maintain it, and the impact these practices have on the
organizational adjustment of members.
NOTES
1
We agree with Turner's (1999) and Smith and Turner's (1995) selection of
socialization as the dominant term under which all work on assimilation,
socialization, and individualization activities can be explored. As a result, when we
use the term socialization in the essay, we are also including the notions of
assimilation, socialization, and individualization. However, when we invoke the
traditional formula of "Organizational Assimilation = Socialization + Individualiza-
tion" here, and later in the paper, we use the term socialization in the sense that
Kramer and Miller (1999) intended with socialization referring to those processes
associated with organizations attempting to mold the newcomer according to company
and work expectations.
2
The sample here falls within the typical standards used in socialization research
to establish newcomer status. For example, Chatman (1991) studied newcomer status
over a 2 ½ year period, and Ashforth and Saks (1996) indicate that new hires occupy
newcomer status for at least the first ten months of work. The newcomers in our
sample served roughly eight months (M = 7.93) in their organizations. Also, we
surveyed newcomers from various work settings, which is consistent with the
sampling philosophy of the vast majority of socialization research. We wanted to
survey newcomers from different work settings to capture the full range of memorable
messages and socialization strategies creating the socialization process in
organizational life for working professionals.
3
Given that memorable messages are assumed to have a long lasting effect on an
individual's behavior, it may appear ironic that organizational newcomers were
sampled. However, Stafford, Burggraf, and Sharkey (1987) indicated out that people
typically forget over 90% of their conversational content in the hour following it and
close to 96% a month later. As a result, any message that was recalled after the
conversation by a participant may be counted as memorable. A crosstabulations table
was constructed that compared when the newcomer received the message and their
tenure with the organization. 95% (n = 101) of the reported memorable messages
were recalled at least one month following their performance demonstrating their
endurance. The fact that people so readily forget the contents of their interaction and
the majority of the messages were confidently recalled one month after their
performance suggests that these messages were memorable and had a lasting effect.

REFERENCES
Anakwe, U. P., & Greenhaus, J. H. (1999). Effective socialization of employees:
Socialization content perspective. Journal of Managerial Issues, 11, 315-329.
Ashford, B. E., & Saks, A. M. (1996). Socialization tactics: Longitudinal effects of
newcomer adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 149-178.
Ashford, B. E., Saks, A. M., & Lee, R. T. (1998). Socialization and newcomer
adjustment: The role of organizational context. Human Relations, 51, 897-926.
Ashford, S. J., & Black, J. S. (1996). Proactivity during organizational entry: The role
of desire for control. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 199-214.
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of the mind. New York: Ballentine.
Brim, O. G., Jr., & Wheeler, S. (1966). Socialization after childhood. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bullis, C. (1999). Mad or bad: A response to Kramer and Miller. Communication
Monographs, 66, 368-373.
254 Memorable Messages

Chao, G. T., O'Leary-Kelly, A. M., Wolf, S., Klein, H. J., & Gardner, P. D. (1994).
Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 79, 730-743.
Chatman, J. A. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization
in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459-484.
Clair, R. P. (1996). The political nature of the colloquialism, "a real job:" Implications
for organizational socialization. Communication Monographs, 63, 249-267.
Clair, R. P. (1999). Ways of seeing: A review of Kramer and Miller's manuscript.
Communication Monographs, 66, 374-381.
Cooper-Thomas, H., & Anderson, N. (2002). Newcomer adjustment: The relationship
between organizational socialization tactics, information acquisition, and
attitudes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75,
423-437.
Daft, R., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media
richness, and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554-571.
Feldman, D. C. (1981). The multiple socialization of organization members. Academy
of Management Review, 6, 309-318.
Frey, L. R., Botan, C. H., & Kreps, G. L. (2000). Investigating communication: An
introduction to research methods (2 nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Galvin, T. (Ed.). (2000). Industry report 2000: A comprehensive analysis of employee-
sponsored training in the United States. Training: The human side of business,
37, 45-95.
Gildsford, J. W. (1998). Organizational rules on communicating: How employees
are-and are not-learning the roles. Journal of Business Communication, 35,
173-201.
Goodman, P. S., Ravlin, E., & Schminke, M. (1987). Understanding groups in
organizations. In L. L. Cummings & B. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational
behavior (vol. 9, pp. 121-173). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Hart, Z. P., Miller, V. D., & Johnson, J. R. (2003). Socialization, resocialization, and
communication relationships in the context of organizational change.
Communication Studies, 54, 483-495.
Hess, J. A. (1993). Assimilating newcomers into an organization: A cultural
perspective. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 189-210.
Jablin, F. M. (1984). Assimilating new members into organization. In R. Bostrom
(Ed.), Communication yearbook (vol. 8, pp. 594-626). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Jablin, F. M. (1987). Organization entry, assimilation and exit. In F. M. Jablin, L. L.
Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational
communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 679-740). Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
Jablin, F. M. (2001). Organizational entry, assimilation, and disengagement/exit. In
F. M. Jablin, & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational
communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 732-818).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jerris, L. A. (1993). Effective employee orientation. New York: American Management
Association.
Jones, G. R. (1986). Socialization tactics, self-efficiency and newcomers' adjustments
to organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 2, 262-279.
Katz, R. (1980). Time and work: Toward an integrative perspective. In B. M. Straw &
L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (vol 2., pp.
81-127). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Knapp, M. L., Stohl, C., & Reardon, K. (1981). Memorable messages. Journal of
Communication, 32, 27-42.
Kramer, M. W., & Miller, V. D. (1999). A response to criticisms of organizational
socialization research: In support of contemporary conceptualization of
organizational assimilation. Communication Monographs, 66, 358-367.
Lawler, E. E., & Finegold, D. (2000). Individualizing the organization: Past, present,
and future. Organizational Dynamics, 29, 1-15.
Summer 2004 255
Lengel, R. H., & Daft, R. (1988). The selection of communication media as an
executive skill. Academy of Management Executive, 2, 225-232.
Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in
entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly,
25, 226-249.
McPhee, R. D., & Zaug, P. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A
framework for explanation. The Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue
Electronique de Communication. http://www.cios.org/getfile/MCPHEE_V10N1200
Mignerey, J. T., Rubin, R. B., & Gorden, W. I. (1995). Organizational entry: An
investigation of newcomer communication behavior and uncertainty. Communi-
cation Research, 22, 54-85.
Miller, V. D. (1996). An experimental study of newcomers' information seeking
behaviors during organizational entry. Communication Studies, 47, 1-24.
Miller, V. D., & Jablin, F. (1991). Information seeking during organizational entry:
Influences, tactics, and a model of the process. Academy of Management
Review, 16, 92-120.
Miller, V. D., & Kramer, M. W. (1999). A reply to Bullis, Turner, and Clair.
Communication Monographs, 66, 390-392.
Morrison, E. W. (1993). Longitudinal study of the effects of information seeking on
newcomer socialization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 173-183.
Mumby, D. K., & Putnam, L. (1992). The politics of emotion: A feminist reading of
bounded rationality. Academy of Management Review, 17, 465-486.
Nicholson, N., & Arnold, J. (1991). From expectation to experience: Graduates
entering a large corporation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 413-429.
Ostroff, C., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1992). Organizational socialization as a learning
process: The role of information acquisition. Personnel Psychology, 45, 849-874.
Ostroff, C., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1993). The role of mentoring in the information
gathering processes of newcomers during early organizational socialization.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 170-183.
Poole, M. S. (1999). Group communication theory. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), The handbook
of group communication theory and research (pp. 37-70). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Porter, L. W., Lawler, E. E., & Hackman, J. R. (1975). Behavior in organizations. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Putnam, L. L., & Fairhurst, G. T. (2001). Discourse analysis in organizations: Issues
and concerns. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of
organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp.
78-136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schein, E. H. (1971). The individual, the organization, and the career: A conceptual
scheme. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7, 401-425.
Smith, R. C., & Turner, P. K. (1995). A social constructionist reconfiguration of
metaphor analysis: An application of "SCMA" to organizational socialization
theorizing. Communication Monographs, 62, 152-181.
Stafford, L., Burggraf, C. S., & Sharkey, W. F. (1987). Conversational memory: The
effects of time, recall, mode, and memory expectancies on remembrances of
natural conversations. Human Communication Research, 14, 203-229.
Stohl, C. (1986). The role of memorable messages in the process of organizational
socialization. Communication Quarterly, 34, 231-249.
Taylor, B. C., & Trujillo, N. (2001). Qualitative research methods. In F. M. Jablin &
L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication:
Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 161-194). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Turner, P. K. (1999). What if you don't?: A response to Kramer and Miller.
Communication Monographs, 66, 382-389.
Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Towards a theory of organizational
socialization. In B. M. Staw, (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (vol. 1,
pp. 209-264). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
256 Memorable Messages

Wanberg, C. R., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of

proactivity in the socialization process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85,
373-385.
Wanous, J. P. (1980). Organizational entry: Recruitment, selection, and socialization of
newcomers. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2 nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ziller, R. (1964). Individuation and socialization: A theory of assimilation in large
organizations. Human Relations, 17, 341-360.