Perceived Challenges When Changing Employer

Abstract

Joining a new employer is an exciting but also challenging experience. To learn more about new employees’ transition into a new work environment, we interviewed newcomers in a medium-sized German IT service provider about the challenges they experienced during organizational entry and how onboarding helped them cope with these. Analyses revealed that participants predominantly experienced professional challenges. A combination of activities – especially social support and integration into everyday work – helped the new hires overcome the challenges they experienced. Findings also showed that opportunities to participate and contribute to the new work environment gain relevance as socialization progresses. These insights into newcomers’ experiences may enable organizations to design an employee-centered onboarding strategy that contributes to newcomers’ successful organizational socialization.

Full text

Original Article
Perceived Challenges When
Changing Employer
What Newcomers Experience as Helpful During
Organizational Entry
Stefanie Birkleand Jürgen Seifried
Economic and Business Education –Professional Teaching and Learning, Business School, University of Mannheim, Germany
Abstract: Joining a new employer is an exciting but also challenging experience. To learn more about new employees’transition into a new work
environment, we interviewed newcomers in a medium-sized German IT service provider about the challenges they experienced during or-
ganizational entry and how onboarding helped them cope with these. Analyses revealed that participants predominantly experienced pro-
fessional challenges. A combination of activities –especially social support and integration into everyday work –helped the new hires overcome
the challenges they experienced. Findings also showed that opportunities to participate and contribute to the new work environment gain
relevance as socialization progresses. These insights into newcomers’experiences may enable organizations to design an employee-centered
onboarding strategy that contributes to newcomers’successful organizational socialization.
Keywords: organizational socialization, onboarding, employee perception, newcomer, longitudinal case study
Research Questions
Starting with a new employer may be challenging for new
employees (Woodrow & Guest, 2020). Difficulties in un-
derstanding the new job duties as well as problems with
social integration or finding one’s feet in the new work
context potentially hamper newcomers’organizational so-
cialization (Bauer & Erdogan, 2014; Nifadkar & Bauer,
2016; Steinmacher et al., 2019). On the contrary, a suc-
cessful start has the potential to foster stable employment
relationships (Gupta et al., 2018) by contributing to new-
comer orientation, relationship building in the new work
environment, job satisfaction, and organizational commit-
ment (Kammeyer-Mueller & Wanberg, 2003; Sharma &
Stol, 2019). This benefits new employees just as much as it
benefits employers, as increased retention rates of qualified
personnel maximize recruitment success and, hence, lower
search costs (Stanley, 2012). In terms of effective on-
boarding that helps new hires get started with their new
employer, this study aims to identify perceived challenges
during the onboarding process (organizational socialization;
research question (RQ) 1) and appropriate onboarding ini-
tiatives to overcome such barriers (RQ 2). Furthermore, as
existingresearch suggests that socialization experience may
vary over time (Woodrow & Guest, 2020), it is investigated
how newcomers’perception changes during organizational
entry (RQ 3). Prolonged data collection over 6 months, via
semistructured interviews, reveals in-depth insights into the
experiences and temporal aspects of newcomers during
organizational socialization. Thus, the results contribute to a
better understanding of how onboarding can help new-
comers overcome challenges during organizational entry.
This may also help sensitize employers to challenges during
organizational socialization and allow them to derive
practical indications for effective onboarding enhancing
newcomers’organizational socialization.
Theoretical Considerations
The Concept of Organizational Socialization
Organizational socialization describes the process by which
new employees become familiar with and adapt to an or-
ganization’s culture, values, norms, practices, and expecta-
tions (Holton, 1996; van Maanen & Schein, 1979). This can
be understood as a longer, ongoing process that focuses on
integrating employees into the organizational culture and
social structures and aims to align their behavior with the
organization’s values and norms. Hence, the core of orga-
nizational socialization is that newcomers “learn how things
are done”(Kowtha, 2018, p. 89) to become active members
of their new employer (Holton, 1996; Saks & Gruman, 2018).
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167
https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000342
© 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Through several individual learning processes, newcomers
approach the status of effectively functioning (Ashforth,
2012) and fully integrated organizational members (Bauer
et al., 2007), and ultimately assume their designated role
(van Maanen & Schein, 1979). This process of learning about
and understanding one’s new work environment and one’s
new job duties is referred to as organizational socialization.
Such a goal-oriented mindset also underlies the term on-
boarding, which is often addressed in the context of orga-
nizational socialization (e.g. Bauer & Erdogan, 2011).
However, there are some important differences between the
two concepts: Onboarding refers to a set of rather short-
termed activities conducted to equip newcomers with mainly
job-specific skills and knowledge in the first few weeks.
Organizational socialization, in contrast, refers to the rather
long-term learning and understanding processes triggered by
these very (onboarding) activities. Consequently, onboarding
serves to promote organizational socialization. Its focus on
the initial phase with a new employer, however, makes
perfect sense, as the following explanations demonstrate.
Challenges During Organizational
Socialization
When a person first enters the organization, little or no
prior knowledge about the new employer and work
environment make organizational socialization and the
underlying learning processes particularly “intense and
problematic”(Klein & Heuser, 2008, p. 280). Difficulties
may be rooted in the uncertainty inherent in interaction
between persons who do not know each other (uncertainty
reduction theory: Berger & Calabrese, 1975). In addition,
newcomers tend to draw on previous experiences with
similar situations to reduce the initial lack of information
(cognitive sense-making theory: Louis, 1980). However, in
most cases, this information is only partially adequate to
explain the conditions and events of the new work envi-
ronment. Consequently, to master the critical phase of
organizational entry, recently hired employees need to get
familiar with (1) professional, (2) social, and (3) contextual
aspects of their new work environment (Ashforth & Saks,
1996; Bauer & Erdogan, 2014; Feldman, 1981; Holton,
1996; van Maanen & Schein, 1979). Professional aspects of
organizational socialization relate to the new role and
include critical knowledge and skills, as well as a func-
tional understanding of how the new job is performed.
Social aspects refer to the interpersonal challenges within
the new workplace, sometimes driven by the personality of
the newcomer (intrapersonal level). Finally, contextual
aspects comprise newcomers’understanding of and fa-
miliarizing with the organization’s culture, work setting,
and, if applicable, new private circumstances (see refer-
ences in Table 1).
Table 1. Overview of potential challenges during organizational socialization
Main level Sublevel Potential challenges
Professional —Challenges at the professional level encompass deficits in knowledge and expertise required to perform the
new job, as well as difficulties in understanding and applying one’s new role, new processes, and
organizational conventions (e.g., task mastery and role clarity: Kammeyer-Mueller & Wanberg, 2003; role
clarity: Lapointe et al., 2014; orientation: Sharma & Stol, 2019). Overall, such deficits may cause difficulties in
fulfilling one’s new job and may impede newcomers’organizational socialization.
Unlike interpersonal challenges, professional challenges are rooted in the new job or the newcomer’s job-
related knowledge, skills, and abilities. Third parties are not involved.
Social Interpersonal Interpersonal challenges relate to difficulties in interacting and building relationships with actors in the new
work environment. Such challenges can either relate purely to the social level or also affect job-related
cooperation between the newcomer and the actors of his/her new work environment (e.g., workgroup
integration: Kammeyer-Mueller & Wanberg, 2003; affect-based trust to supervisor and coworkers: Lapointe
et al., 2014; social acceptance: Bauer et al., 2007).
Unlike professional challenges, interpersonal challenges always involve two or more parties.
Intrapersonal Intrapersonal challenges are rooted in the personality traits, behaviors, beliefs, attitudes, values, and norms
of the newcomer.
Contextual Organizational culture The newcomer has difficulty understanding, appropriately implementing, and/or identifying with the cultural
norms in the new work environment. This may be rooted in a lack of information about the prevailing beliefs,
orientations, values, and norms (Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Kowtha, 2018) as well as desired behaviors in the new
work environment (van Maanen & Schein, 1979).
All of these components support newcomers’overall understanding of their new employer and serve to align
their behaviors with the conventions of the new workplace (political knowledge: Kammeyer-Mueller &
Wanberg, 2003; role orientation: Saks et al., 2007).
Work setting The newcomer has difficulty settling into the new work organizational environment.
Private sphere Starting with a new employer has changed the newcomer’s private context, resulting in additional effort for
the newcomer.
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167© 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry 157

Considering such diverse challenges and aiming to
optimally support newcomers’organizational socialization
process, it seems reasonable to start by identifying which
challenges new employees perceive when starting with a
new employer (RQ 1).
The Concept of Onboarding
Having identified the challenges new employees may get
confronted with when joining a new organization, it is
important to offer ways and resources to successfully
address the challenges. To this end, employers can in-
troduce onboarding. Onboarding encompasses “all formal
or informal practices, programs, and policies enacted or
engaged in by an organization or its agents to facilitate
newcomer adjustment”(Klein & Polin, 2012, p. 268). Such
a bundle of activities guides organizations and newcomers
during organizational entry and helps newcomers struc-
ture their experiences as they move through the sociali-
zation process (Klein & Heuser, 2008). Hence, the idea of
onboarding is to support newcomers in resolving initial
uncertainty, encourage sense-making, and provide all
resources needed to perform the new role (Klein et al.,
2015; Moon, 2018). Over the long term, onboarding can
help strengthen the psychological bond between new-
comers and the organization (Caldwell & Peters, 2018). In
other words, onboarding describes the activities per-
formed by an organization or its agents to foster new-
comers’organizational socialization (Meyer & Bartels,
2017), whereas organizational socialization refers to the
underlying processes (i.e., individual learning and un-
derstanding) that lead to newcomer integration into a new
work environment (Klein & Polin, 2012).
Specific onboarding activities can be distinguished, for
instance, according to their purpose, as suggested in Klein
and Heuser’s inform–welcome–guide (IWG) model (2008,
p. 319). Each category of the IWG model –respectively, the
onboarding activities assigned to them –addresses certain
needs of new employees that may arise from the chal-
lenges they perceive during organizational entry (see
Table 2). Consequently, onboarding activities are poten-
tially well suited to helping newcomers successfully
overcome perceived challenges on joining a new organi-
zation. This argumentation can be considered compre-
hensible and appropriate. The difficulty rather seems to lie
in correctly understanding the needs of newcomers and
providing adequate support.
Findings on newcomers’perception of onboarding ac-
tivities reveal how differently newcomers experience the
onboarding activities offered by their new employer. For
instance, some newcomers value and benefit most from
early and formal onboarding (Klein et al., 2015); others
prefer flexible structures that allow them to define their
role within the new context (Søreide, 2016). Other studies
illustrate that newcomers supplement onboarding activi-
ties to foster their organizational socialization. Especially
coworkers and sometimes supervisors serve as valuable
information resources, influencing newcomers’learning
experiences, and thus contributing to a positive sociali-
zation experience (Harris et al., 2020; R. Korte & Lin,
2013; R. Korte et al., 2015; R. F. Korte, 2009; Mornata &
Cassar, 2018). Networking initiatives (Fleming et al., 2016)
and other processing strategies of influences from the new
work environment, e.g., change of role, information
seeking or interacting with others through befriending,
negotiating or exchange (Cooper-Thomas et al., 2012), can
have a positive impact on newcomers’adjustment success.
While these findings demonstrate the complexity of
newcomers’experience and provide some guidance for
effective onboarding design, negative socialization expe-
riences are hardly considered in the current body of
Table 2. Extended inform–welcome–guide model
Main category Subcategory 1 Subcategory 2 Definition (adopted from Klein & Heuser, 2008, p. 319, for all onboarding categories)
Onboarding Inform Communication Planned efforts to facilitate communication with newcomers. Includes both the provision
of one-way messages and opportunities for two-way dialogs.
Resources Making materials or assistance available to new hires. These efforts differ from
communication in that the new hire has to take the initiative to access them.
Training Planned efforts to facilitate the systematic acquisition of skills, behaviors, and knowledge.
Welcome Activities that provide opportunities for new hires to meet and socialize with other
organizational members and/or celebrate the arrival of the newcomer.
Guide Activities that provide a personal guide for each new hire.
Individual efforts In contrast to onboarding activities, individual efforts are initiated by the newcomer himself/
herself. Often, they are based on the newcomer’s personality or motivation. Contrary to
resources, individual efforts do not rely on organizational capacities.
Other activities All activities that helped the newcomer overcome perceived challenges and do not represent
onboarding activities or individual efforts can be assigned to this category.
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167 © 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
158 S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry

research. Woodrow and Guest (2020) recently showed
that it is precisely negative experiences and the way
employers deal with them that determine newcomers’
organizational socialization. Aiming to address this po-
tential of a bumpy start, the study at hand delivers detailed
insights into how onboarding helps newcomers overcome
perceived challenges during organizational socialization
(RQ 2).
As mentioned at the beginning, organizational sociali-
zation is a long-term process that involves various orga-
nizational activities and individual efforts of the new
employees. Given this complexity, the perception of or-
ganizational socialization conditions may vary over time
(Woodrow & Guest, 2020). It is therefore worth consid-
ering onboarding activities at different points in time
during the process of organizational socialization. Such
longitudinal studies are needed to gain detailed under-
standing of how socialization success develops over time
(Harris, 2023). By paying particular attention to temporal
differences in new employees’socialization experiences
(RQ 3), we aim to learn more about how newcomers’
perceptions change during entry into an organization
(Woodrow & Guest, 2020). Connecting socialization
barriers with approved activities and resources to resolve
them allows us to provide comprehensive information that
will support organizations in improving their onboarding
and consequently help newcomers overcome challenges
during organizational entry. Specifically, by considering
the temporal perspective, findings have the potential to
contribute to newcomers’organizational socialization and
help them to settle into their new roles more easily.
Research Design
Methodological Approach and Context of
the Study
Overall, this study follows a postpositivist research para-
digm (Creswell & Poth, 2018) aiming to capture new-
comers’perceptions of challenges during organizational
socialization and supportive activities in dealing with
them. Case studies are considered an appropriate method
to gain an in-depth understanding of specific events and
behavioral patterns –such as entry barriers and on-
boarding activities (Njie & Asimiran, 2014) –thus, con-
tributing to determine potential cause and effect relations
during newcomers’organizational socialization. More-
over, qualitative inquiry has proven to be suitable for
capturing individual experiences and interpreting them in
the context of individual life realities (Patton, 2015; Yin,
2018), thus adding to a practice-oriented and empirically
driven knowledge base (Dul & Hak, 2008) approximating
reality (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017). In this sense, the study
was designed as a longitudinal embedded single case study
(Yin, 2018) with the newcomers (embedded units of
analysis) of a German medium-sized IT service provider
(the case). The company employs around 450 employees
and operates in the insurance industry as a full service
provider of complex IT solutions. Customer orientation,
innovation, and effectiveness are top priorities, resulting in
high-performance requirements. Given the ongoing
shortage of IT professionals (Bitkom, 2022) and two global
competitors nearby, the small and medium-sized enter-
prise (SME) is struggling to attract and retain qualified
personnel. Such framework conditions and organizational
characteristics are representative of the German IT SME
sector. By initiating the scientific collaboration, the IT
service provider intended to improve its onboarding to
give its newcomers a smooth start and thereby lay the
foundation for long-term employment relationships.
Instrument
Since interviews “are particularly helpful for providing
thick descriptions of events and at least their short-term
consequences”(Ashforth, 2012, p. 163), we decided to
encourage new employees in semistructured interviews to
report how they perceived organizational socialization at
their new employer [the interview questions used are
available in Table E1 in the Electronic Supplementary
Material (ESM 1)]. At three points in time, participants
were asked in chronological order (Small & Cook, 2023) to
report what onboarding activities they experienced (In-
terview Topic 1), what challenges they faced during their
organizational entry (Interview Topic 2), and whether the
onboarding activities described in the interview, any other
activities, or the participants themselves contributed to
overcoming the perceived challenges (Interview Topic 3).
Capturing newcomers’experiences in several small steps
seemed reasonable because shorter intervals between the
event of interest and data collection reduce any recall bias
(Rausch, 2014) and thus increase findings’validity. Fur-
thermore, “a research design and research process that
enables prolonged engagement with the research context
will be more likely to offer a rigorous answer to the
questions posed”(Anderson, 2017, p. 130), allowing for a
precise mapping of participants’reality.
Sampling and Data Collection
Following the purposeful sampling method (Palinkas et al.,
2015), exclusively new employees were invited to participate
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167© 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry 159

Table 3. Sample characteristics
Participant
Field of
activity
Sex Age (in years)
Professional experience
In years Related to new job duties
MF≤25 26–30 31–40 41–50 >50 None <5 5–10 11–20 21–30 >30 Description
a
Fit
b
P01 IT-related x x x Job duties are partly familiar and partly new. Has extensive experience
with two products (30 and 6 years).
High
P02 Support
services
x x x Has a basic technical understanding because she previously managed
the same job duties operationally for 4 years. Now she manages them
strategically from a higher hierarchical level.
Moderate
P03 IT-related x x x Has worked with the same technology for 6 months but has no
industry experience.
Low
P04 Support
services
x x x Has 20 years of industry experience and has managed the same
product from a different perspective for 5 years.
Moderate
P05 IT-related x x x Was for 14 years an all-rounder in the current subject area and for
now holds a specialist role.
High
P06 IT-related x x x Has 10 years of experience in the actual field of activity. High
P07 IT-related x x x Has previously performed identical job duties for approx. 6 years.
However, the organization’s infrastructure and the technologies
used are new.
High
P08 IT-related x x x Knows the software that has been being supported for 8 years and
has as much experience coordinating tasks.
High
P09 IT-related x x x Has little industry experience but has performed the same job duties
for 2.5 years.
High
P10 IT-related x x x Has worked in organizations of comparable size for 16 years and knows
the software that has been being supported for 10 years. Her specific
job duties, in contrast, are new.
Moderate
Total 5 5 —5311—23 3 11
Note. M = male, F = female.
a
Participant-specific summary of all statements on the professional experience of the respective newcomer. The statements were coded as either responses to interview topic four in
the first interview or elsewhere in the three interviews if they referred to the newcomer’s professional experience.
b
Indicates how well a newcomer’s professional experience matches the new job (high = previous
professional activities correspond fully or to a large extent to the new job duties, moderate = previous professional activities partly overlap with the new job duties, low = no or only basic professional experience
related to the new job duties).
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167 © 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
160 S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry

in the study. Potential participants were informed about the
study through an e-mail from the HR department of the IT
service provider. In this e-mail, it was explicitly stated that
participation was voluntary and that responses would be
processed anonymously. A total of 13 newcomers were
willing to participate, with only 10 participants engaging in
all three interviews, thus constituting the sample (for sample
characteristics, see Table 3). Most of the newcomers were
hired to perform IT-related activities such as programming
and development. The gender ratio is balanced. Half of the
sample is between age 26 and 30 years. All participants
reported having professional experience, although to
varying degrees and with varying relevance to the new job.
Although the sample is rather small, it can be considered
appropriate in view of the research objectives, methodology,
and context of the study. Moreover, thematic saturation
emerged during data analysis, which can be considered
another indicator toward an acceptable sample (Guest et al.,
2006; Hennink & Kaiser, 2022). Hence, findings of the
30 in-depth interviews (three interviews per participant)
may adequately contribute to knowledge on organizational
socialization and coping strategies for perceived challenges
during this phase.
Once a newcomer agreed to participate, the three in-
terviews were collected over a total data collection period
of 6 months. In the beginning, all interviews took place in
face-to-face meetings with the first author of this paper.
Later, we switch to telephone interviews due to contact
restrictions during the coronavirus pandemic. All inter-
views were audio-recorded and transcribed (Mayring,
2014). In total, 17.5 h of interview material was col-
lected, with single interviews lasting from about 19 min to
about 1 h.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed with MaxQDA 2022 applying the
structuring content analysis according to Mayring (2014).
Thereby, deductive as well as inductive analysis proce-
dures were used. Answering the first research question on
perceived challenges of joining a new employer started
with the development of a coding manual (see Table E2 in
ESM 1).
Its categories were derived from the empirical findings
on the challenges of changing employers (deductive cat-
egory assignment) allowing to summarize newcomers’
statements in overarching themes. In several material
runs, two coders repeatedly compared and refined the
codes with each other and finally completed the coding
manual with examples from the interview data. The codes
of the final material run show satisfactory intercoder
reliability with a Cohen’sκcoefficient of 0.84 (Hsu &
Field, 2003; Landis & Koch, 1977). Answering the second
research question started with coding conducive activities
to overcome the perceived challenges during organiza-
tional socialization using the categories of the IWG model
(see Table 2, again deductive category assignment). For
statements that did not fit into the IWG categories, the
coders extended the model by new categories (inductive
category formation allowing to capture new aspects). Both
coders performed several material runs and discussed
differences in the coding until a complete agreement was
reached. Finally, to investigate whether and how new-
comers’perception changes during organizational entry
(RQ 3), participants’statements for each of the three in-
terview appointments were compared.
Findings
RQ 1: Which Challenges Do Newcomers
Perceive When Starting With a New
Employer?
Overall, newcomers perceived 20 different challenges
during their organizational entry, which they reported in 27
statements (see Figure 1). Newcomers’experiences related
to all three levels of organizational socialization. Profes-
sional challenges were most frequently addressed (13
statements). Within this category, participants described
subject-related challenges due to the new subject area and
tasks (seven statements) and procedural challenges due to
the new tools and technical infrastructure (two and one
statements, respectively), the new job-related processes
(two statements), or the lack of knowledge about con-
nections between the organizational units (one statement).
Social and contextual challenges were perceived consid-
erably less frequently (six and eight statements, respec-
tively). On the social level, getting to know the new
colleagues and the way of communicating and working
with them presented an initial hurdle (one statement each:
interpersonal challenges). Moreover, finding patience for
the socialization process (two statements) and dealing with
the responsibility gained in the new job (one statement)
were reported as intrapersonal challenges. Regarding
contextual challenges, some newcomers, for instance,
needed a bit of time to familiarize with the setup and
equipment of the new work setting (two and one state-
ments, respectively). The same applied in one case each to
the new organizational culture and the new city to which a
newcomer had to move for his new job.
Overall, for research question one, it can be stated that
newcomers to the IT service provider most frequently
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167© 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry 161

perceived professional challenges during their organiza-
tional entry. Social and contextual challenges were also
mentioned but occurred comparatively seldom.
RQ 2: How Does Onboarding Help
Newcomers Overcome Perceived
Challenges During Organizational Entry?
In total, participants named 152 activities that helped them
overcome the challenges perceived when starting with
their new employer (see Table 4). More than half of the
statements (86 statements) fell into the categories of the
IWG model according to Klein and Heuser (2008). Re-
sources was by far the most frequently addressed category
(58 statements), especially support from new colleagues
(44 statements). In addition, participants described Indi-
vidual efforts as conducive to dealing with the challenges
during organizational entry (27 statements), i.e., for in-
stance, writing documentation or using the internet to
research information (three statements each). Finally, the
subcategories Integration into everyday work and Learning
by doing were comparably often described as helpful in
dealing with perceived challenges (14 and 17 statements,
respectively). Participants’perceived relevance of such
other activities in dealing with perceived challenges during
organizational entry led us to describe Klein and Heuser’s
original model as the extended IWG (EIWG) model.
Looking at the different types of perceived challenges, it
is striking that most of the mentioned activities helped
overcome professional challenges –especially subject-
related challenges (99 and 63 statements, respectively).
Regarding social and contextual challenges, considerably
fewer activities were described as helpful (24 and 29
statements, respectively). This distribution also applies to
the average number of helpful activities per perceived
challenge. Most activities were mentioned as helpful in
dealing with professional challenges (7.6 statements per
challenge; 4.0 and 3.6 statements per social and contextual
challenge, respectively). Thus, a bias due to the number of
challenges mentioned per challenge type can be negated.
During data analyses, evidence emerged that one activity
usually contributed to overcoming multiple organizational
entry challenges. Furthermore, it became evident that one
challenge could usually be overcome with the help of several
activities. The organizational entry experiences of partici-
pant P10 exemplify these findings well: P10 described
challenges at all three levels of organizational socialization.
Familiarizing with the new subject matter (subject-related)
and lacking patience to learn the ropes (intrapersonal)
caused initial discomfort just as finding one’s way around
the new premises and the break room facilities (work set-
ting). Successfully dealing with these challenges was pre-
dominantly due to the support of P10’s new colleagues.
“The team being supportive helped and still helps [to] deal
with these challenges.”Colleagues were a reliable resource
for P10, providing a sense of safety during her early days
with the new employer, because for her, “the most im-
portant thing is that [she] has someone [she] can turn to.”
For three of the four challenges P10 perceived, she iden-
tified a combination of activities as helpful in overcoming
them. For instance, learning about the new topic was
Figure 1. Total counts of newcomers’statements on perceived challenges during organizational entry.
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167 © 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
162 S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry

Table 4. Perceived challenges during organizational entry and activities conducive to overcoming them
Activities
Perceived challenges
(main level and sublevel)
Total
number of
statements
Professional Social Contextual
Subject-related Procedural Interpersonal Intrapersonal
Organizational
culture
Work
setting
Private
sphere
Inform
Communication 2 1 —— —11586
Resources 24 19 1 5 2 6 1 58
Training 9 3 —2—3—17
Welcome ——1——1—2
Guide 3 1 —— ———4
Individual efforts 11 7 1 3 —41 27
Other
Integration in work 3 2 2 3 2 2 —14 39
Learning by doing 10 3 1 2 1 ——17
Team event ———— —112
Professional experience 1 —— 1———2
Single mentions ——2——2—4
Total number of statements 63 36 8 16 5 20 4 152
99 24 29
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167© 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry 163

facilitated by exchanging with colleagues and a handover
list prepared by her predecessor (resources). At the same
time, different training activities, such as the introductory
seminar, job shadowing, and several pieces of training from
her predecessor, promoted P10’s progress regarding the
new topic. Complementing this, P10 wrote documentation
to “check back everything now and then”what she has
already learned (individual efforts). “What also help[ed],”
added P10, “[was] to do one thing at a time.”This ac-
ceptance of a gradual learning phase (individual efforts),
which P10 described in the second interview, also com-
pensated for her initial lack of patience. Finally, P10 de-
scribed “the daily doing”as helpful in getting into the new
subject matter. By working on her own (learning by doing),
P10 soon recognized “that it got better and [she] got a little
bit of an overview; gaps kept closing and things became full
circle.”
Comparably to P10, the other newcomers, too, re-
peatedly described multiple activities, mostly from dif-
ferent categories of the EIWG model, as conducive to
overcoming one or more perceived challenges during their
organizational entry with the IT service provider. Hence,
research question two can be answered as follows: New-
comers perceived a variety of activities that helped them
overcome the perceived challenges during organizational
entry. These activities address all categories of the IWG
model, whereby support from colleagues was most fre-
quently cited as helpful (resources). In addition to the IWG
categories, all participants described individual efforts as
well as integration in everyday work and learning by doing
as helpful. Furthermore, it was striking that the newcomers
mostly described one activity as helpful in overcoming
several challenges. One challenge was usually overcome
with a combination of several activities.
RQ 3: How Does Newcomers’Perception
Change During Organizational Entry?
As shown in Figure 2, newcomers’perceptions of sup-
portive activities to overcome perceived barriers to entry
varied over time. In the first interview, organizational
efforts (summarized with the dashed frame) dominated
across all types of challenge. Especially “resources”were
mentioned often. In the second and third interviews,
newcomers’perception of “resources”and the IWG cat-
egories overall steadily decreased. On the contrary, “in-
dividual efforts”as well as “integration in everyday work”
and “learning by doing”increased over time (the latter two
are summarized with the bold frame). This development
seems reasonable, as newcomers need some time to fa-
miliarize themselves with the new work environment
before they can act independently within the scope of their
new job duties.
Looking at the three types of challenges separately, it is
noticeable that most supportive activities have been
Figure 2. Activities conducive to overcoming perceived challenges across the first 6 months after organizational entry.
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167 © 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
164 S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry

perceived to be conducive to overcoming professional
challenges. At the same time, however, “individual ef-
forts”increased as socialization progressed –especially
“integration into everyday work”and “learning by doing”
became more prominent. To overcome social challenges,
slightly more support activities were named in the second
interview. As expected, “individual efforts”and “inte-
gration into everyday work”were helpful in this regard.
Finally, in terms of contextual challenges, the most con-
ducive activities were mentioned shortly after organiza-
tional entry (1st Interview). Here, participants mostly
named organizational efforts –in particular
“resources”–as helpful to get along with the new situation.
Taken together, it can be stated for research question
three, that newcomers’perception concerning supportive
activities to overcome challenges on starting with a new
employer varies as organizational socialization proceeds.
Over time, individual efforts, integration into everyday
work, and learning by doing become more relevant in
solving initial hurdles. Organizational efforts –as repre-
sented by the IWG model –in contrast are more relevant
right after organizational entry and then fade out.
Discussion and Conclusion
This case study dealt with newcomers’perceptions of
challenges during organizational entry and conducive
activities to overcome these challenges. Analyses revealed
that the newcomers under consideration experienced
professional challenges more often than social and con-
textual hurdles. Furthermore, all newcomers reported a
combination of activities that facilitated their organiza-
tional entry. It was striking that organizational efforts were
rather perceived at the beginning of newcomers’organi-
zational socialization, while individual efforts gained rel-
evance as socialization progressed. Consequently, Klein
and Heuser’s IWG model (2008) fell short in supporting
newcomers’successful start with their new employer.
Rather, it had to be expanded to include newcomers’in-
dividual efforts, their integration into everyday work, and
their uptake of the new job duties as conducive practice to
facilitate organizational socialization.
Findings confirm existing evidence on the relevance of
newcomers’colleagues for organizational socialization
(Harris et al., 2020), learning by doing as an effective
learning strategy (Billett, 2022) as well as newcomers’
influence as active cocreators of the socialization process
(e.g., Bauer et al., 2019). Beyond that, the longitudinal
research design revealed that newcomers’perception of
conducive socialization efforts changes over time. In
conclusion, this case study’s findings guide employers in
designing an employee-centered socialization plan that is
adapted to newcomers’varying needs and acknowledges
individual activity as well as employer-led efforts.
When interpreting the results, it is important to keep in
mind that the findings are based on self-reports from 10
newcomers to one organization. Self-reporting can be bi-
ased mainly by memory effects and socially desirable re-
sponse patterns. Therefore, further data collection with
newcomers in other organizations and, optimally, with
other actors involved in the socialization process, such as
colleagues of the newcomers, is needed to substantiate the
findings and provide a more comprehensive picture of any
challenges during organizational entry and the new hires’
socialization progress. Cross-checking newcomers’per-
ception may reveal hygiene factors (introduced by Herz-
berg and colleagues; Sachau, 2007) that newcomers do not
explicitly name but consider to be conducive to their entry.
Finally, a research design, applying digital survey formats
could reduce influences through researcher interaction and
allow for shorter survey intervals (e.g., via digital diaries).
In conclusion, the findings argue for offering a mixed set
of organizational onboarding activities and opportunities
for individual participation, from which newcomers can
always choose those they find most conducive to a certain
need during their start with a new employer. Moreover,
newcomers’colleagues should be prepared for their role
during organizational socialization so that new employees
receive optimal support right from the start. Finally, regular
feedback provided to and solicited from the newcomer can
help intervene in the socialization process as needed.
Electronic Supplementary Material
The following electronic supplementary material is
available with this article at https://doi.org/10.1027/
1866-5888/a000342
ESM 1. Interview questions and coding manual
References
Anderson, V. (2017). Criteria for evaluating qualitative research.
Human Resource Development Quarterly,28(2), 125–133. https://
doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21282
Ashforth,B.E.(2012).Theroleoftimeinsocializationdynamics.InC.R.
Wanberg (Ed.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of
organizational socialization (pp. 161–186). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199763672.013.0009
Ashforth, B. E., & Saks, A. M. (1996). Socialization tactics: Longi-
tudinal effects on newcomer adjustment. Academy of Man-
agement Journal,39(1), 149–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/256634
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167© 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry 165

Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., & Tucker, J. S.
(2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socializa-
tion: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and
methods. The Journal of Applied Psychology,92(3), 707–721.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.707
Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2011). Organizational socialization: The
effective onboarding of new employees. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA
handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: Main-
taining, expanding, and contracting the organization (Vol. 3, pp.
51–64). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.
1037/12171-002
Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2014). Delineating and reviewing the role of
newcomer capital in organizational socialization. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,1(1),
439–457. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091251
Bauer, T. N., Perrot, S., Liden, R. C., & Erdogan, B. (2019). Under-
standing the consequences of newcomer proactive behaviors:
The moderating contextual role of servant leadership. Journal of
Vocational Behavior,112, 356–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.
2019.05.001
Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explanations in initial
interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of in-
terpersonal communication. Human Communication Research,
1(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x
Billett, S. (2022). Learning in and through work: Positioning the
individual. In C. Harteis, D. Gijbels, & E. Kyndt (Eds.), Professional
and practice-based learning. Research approaches on work-
place learning (Vol. 31, pp. 157–175). Springer. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-030-89582-2_7
Bitkom. (2022, January 3). IT-Fachkr ¨
aftelücke wird gr ¨
oßer: 96.000
offene Jobs [IT professional gap grows: 96,000 open jobs] [Press
release]. https://www.bitkom.org/Presse/Presseinformation/
IT-Fachkraefteluecke-wird-groesser
Caldwell, C., & Peters, R. (2018). New employee onboarding –psy-
chological contracts and ethical perspectives. Journal of Man-
agement Development,37(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-
10-2016-0202
Cooper-Thomas, H., Anderson, N., & Cash, M. (2012). Investigating
organizational socialization: A fresh look at newcomer adjust-
ment strategies. Personnel Review,41(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/
10.1108/00483481211189938
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research
design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed., international
student edition). Sage.
Dul, J., & Hak, T. (2008). Case study methodology in business
research (Repr). Elsevier.
Feldman, D. C. (1981). The multiple socialization of organization
members. Academy of Management Review,6(2), 309–318.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1981.4287859
Fleming, S. S., Goldman, A. W., Correll, S. J., & Taylor, C. J. (2016).
Settling in: The role of individual and departmental tactics in the
development of new faculty networks. The Journal of Higher
Education,87(4), 544–572. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2016.0018
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are
enough? Field Methods,18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1525822X05279903
Gupta, P. D., Bhattacharya, S., Sheorey, P., & Coelho, P. (2018).
Relationship between onboarding experience and turnover in-
tention: Intervening role of locus of control and self-efficacy.
Industrial and Commercial Training,50(2), 61–80. https://doi.
org/10.1108/ICT-03-2017-0023
Harris, L., Cooper-Thomas, H., Smith, P., & Smollan, R. (2020).
Reclaiming the social in socialization: A practice-based under-
standing of newcomer adjustment. Human Resource Develop-
ment Quarterly,31(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.
21384
Harris, L. (2023). The social side of socialization: Exploring how
relationships shape newcomer learning and adjustment. https://
hdl.handle.net/2292/64558
Hennink, M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in
qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests.
Social Science & Medicine,292, Article 114523. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
Holton, E. F., III (1996). New employee development: A review und
reconceptualization. Human Resource Development Quarterly,
7(3), 233–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920070305
Hsu, L. M., & Field, R. (2003). Interrater agreement measures:
Comments on Kappa n, Cohen’s Kappa, Scott’sπ, and Aickin’sα.
Understanding Statistics,2(3), 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1207/
S15328031US0203_03
Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D., & Wanberg, C. R. (2003). Unwrapping the
organizational entry process: Disentangling multiple antecedents
and their pathways to adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88(5), 779–794. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.779
Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying
research paradigms in educational contexts. International
Journal of Higher Education,6(5), Article 26. https://doi.org/10.
5430/ijhe.v6n5p26
Klein, H. J., & Heuser, A. E. (2008). The learning of socialization
content: A framework for researching orientating practices. In J.
J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources
management (Vol. 27, pp. 279–336). https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0742-7301(08)27007-6
Klein, H. J., & Polin, B. (2012). Are organizations on board with best
practices onboarding? In C. R. Wanberg (Ed.), The Oxford
handbook of organizational socialization (pp. 267–287). Oxford
University Press.
Klein, H. J., Polin, B., & Sutton, K. L. (2015). Specific onboarding
practices for the socialization of new employees. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment,23(3), 263–283. https://
doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12113
Korte, R., Brunhaver, S., & Sheppard, S. (2015). (Mis)Interpretations
of organizational socialization: The expectations and experiences
of newcomers and managers. Human Resource Development
Quarterly,26(2), 185–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21206
Korte, R., & Lin, S. (2013). Getting on board: Organizational so-
cialization and the contribution of social capital. Human Rela-
tions,66(3), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712461927
Korte, R. F. (2009). How newcomers learn the social norms of an
organization: A case study of the socialization of newly hired
engineers. Human Resource Development Quarterly,20(3),
285–306. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20016
Kowtha, N. R. (2018). Organizational socialization of newcomers:
The role of professional socialization. International Journal of
Training and Development,22(2), 87–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/
ijtd.12120
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer
agreement for categorical data. Biometrics,33(1), 159–174.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Lapointe, ´
E.,Vandenberghe,C.,&Boudrias,J.-S.(2014).Orga-
nizational socialization tactics and newcomer adjustment:
The mediating role of role clarity and affect-based trust
relationships. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology,87(3), 599–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.
12065
Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers
experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Ad-
ministrative Science Quarterly,25(2), 226–251. https://doi.org/
10.2307/2392453
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foun-
dation, basic procedures and software solutions. Beltz. https://
nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-395173
Journal of Personnel Psychology (2024), 23(3), 156–167 © 2023 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
166 S. Birkle & J. Seifried, Perceived Challenges During Organizational Entry

Meyer, A. M., & Bartels, L. K. (2017). The impact of onboarding levels
on perceived utility, organizational commitment, organizational
support, and job satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Psy-
chology,17(5), 10–27. https://search.proquest.com/docview/
1967314059?accountid=14570
Moon, H. (2018). Unleashing apprenticeship: From onboarding to
professional development. European Journal of Training and
Development,42(1-2), 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-06-
2017-0056
Mornata, C., & Cassar, I. (2018). The role of insiders and orga-
nizational support in the learning process of newcomers
during organizational socialization. Journal of Workplace
Learning,30(7), 562–575. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-06-
2017-0045
Nifadkar, S. S., & Bauer, T. N. (2016). Breach of belongingness:
Newcomer relationship conflict, information, and task-related
outcomes during organizational socialization. The Journal of Ap-
plied Psychology,101(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000035
Njie, B., & Asimiran, S. (2014)