Turning Task-Adjusted Temporary Newcomers into Permanent Employees: An Identity Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While most of the socialization literature has focused on factors that allow newcomers to adjust to their new job tasks successfully, less attention has been given to examining whether temporary newcomers’ task adjustment influences the likelihood of receiving a permanent position. Drawing on the identity perspective and the socialization literature, this study proposes and tests a new framework that examines the probability of task-adjusted newcomers receiving a permanent job offer contingent on two conditions: a) there is a low level of peer divestiture socialization, which enables the task-adjusted newcomer to achieve higher levels of task performance, and b) the newcomer displays low rule-following behavior, which allows the high-performing newcomer to be cognitively trusted by the supervisor. Consistent with our predictions, the results of a four-wave, multisource study featuring 194 newcomer-supervisor dyads revealed that newcomer task adjustment was positively related to the newcomer receiving a permanent job offer by way of newcomer task performance and supervisor trust in newcomers but only when peer divestiture socialization and newcomer rule-following behavior were low. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of these findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".