IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/mrrpps/v33y2010i9p865-876.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of organizational attractiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Joel T. Nadler
  • Nicole L. Cundiff
  • Meghan R. Lowery
  • Stacy Jackson

Abstract

Purpose - Past research on flextime programs often treat work schedule flexibility as a homogeneous construct. The purpose of this paper is to empirically demonstrate the relationship between different flexible work schedules and employee perceptions of organizational attractiveness. Design/methodology/approach - Participants (n = 655) reviewed a scenario with work schedule flexibility manipulated into one of eight consecutively more flexible schedules. Participants then rated the job offer within the scenario on organizational attractiveness. Findings - The study found significant differences in organizational attractiveness based on the eight types of work schedule flexibility. The study's results supported categorizing flextime programs as heterogeneous constructs. Research limitations/implications - The study utilized scenarios reducing generalization to work situations. Participants were college students with a limited work experience and may have viewed organizational attractiveness based on expectations, not on experiences. Future studies should examine workforce populations and also examine different work schedule flexibility programs' effects on absenteeism and productivity. Practical implications - The study suggested that work schedule flexibility affects future employees' perceptions of organizational attractiveness. Attracting high‐quality employees is in the best interests of organizations and the effects of a flexible work schedule may begin before employees are hired. Originality/value - The paper illustrates that different work schedule flexibility schedules, often labeled “flextime,” are perceived differently regarding organizational attractiveness. The paper further supports the notion that work schedule flexibility is a complex construct that cannot be examined using one broad term.

Suggested Citation

  • Joel T. Nadler & Nicole L. Cundiff & Meghan R. Lowery & Stacy Jackson, 2010. "Perceptions of organizational attractiveness," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(9), pages 865-876, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:mrrpps:v:33:y:2010:i:9:p:865-876
    DOI: 10.1108/01409171011070297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/01409171011070297/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/01409171011070297/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/01409171011070297?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Jianhong & Zhou, Chaohong & van Gorp, Désirée M. & van Witteloostuijn, Arjen, 2020. "Willingness to work for multinational enterprises from emerging countries: The case of Chinese multinational enterprises in the Netherlands," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(5).
    2. Greta Onken-Menke & Stephan Nüesch & Claudia Kröll, 2018. "Are you attracted? Do you remain? Meta-analytic evidence on flexible work practices," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 11(2), pages 239-277, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:mrrpps:v:33:y:2010:i:9:p:865-876. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.