Background:
Onboarding, the process of bringing in, training, and acculturating new hires (Acevedo & Yancey, 2011; Klein & Weaver, 2000; Klein et al., 2015; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979), is one of the most common talent development interventions but it is often viewed as ineffective by the newcomers who experience it and the human resource development professionals who implement it (Association for Talent Development, 2017; Klein et al., 2015; Lengnick-Hall et al, 2009; Rollag et al., 2005; Saks & Gruman, 2012; Wanous & Reichers, 2000). Human resource development (HRD) professionals and scholars agree that onboarding is critical for retention and engagement (Fyock, 2009; Graybill et al., 2013; Mahan et al., 2019; Ncube, 2008; Workforce Management, 2009a). Several studies demonstrate that negative onboarding experiences can cause significant newcomer turnover and costs for organizations (Bagley, 2008; Galagan, 2015; Mahan et al., 2019) as well as impair an individual’s career development (Arachchige, 2014; Chao et al., 1994; Srimannarayana, 2016).
The purpose of this study is to better understand how newcomers experience onboarding, a critical career transition—what happens to them, what helps them, what hinders them, and what they hope for—which can contribute to developing a pragmatic theory about onboarding.
Research Questions:
- What helps newcomers’ successful onboarding?
- What hinders newcomers’ successful onboarding?
- What hopes do newcomers have for successful onboarding?
Research design
The research design for this study employs Enhanced Critical Incident Technique (ECIT) and a diary study or experience sampling (Fisher & To, 2012).
ECIT is widely used as a qualitative research method (Butterfield et al., 2009) and is “ideal for understanding participant’s experiences” (Butterfield, et al., 2010, p. 146). ECIT usually uses a semi-structured protocol which has been demonstrated as useful for workplace contexts (Butterfield et al., 2010) and life transitions (Britten, 2014).
Diary studies are a data collection method that allows anyone to report and reflect on their everyday experiences when and where they happen (Czerwinksi, et al., 2004; Hyers, 2018) and also provide an opportunity for participants to engage in self-reflection (Hyers, 2018; Korver, 2016). Diary studies provide advantages over retrospective interviews in that participants are recording their experiences closer to the actual occurrence (Fisher & To, 2012). Diaries have long been used a research tool in the work setting (Hyers, 2018; Reis et al, 2010) to study phenomena such as job satisfaction (Fisher & To, 2012).
Using a combination of interval- and event-contingent sampling, participants are asked to record at least once per week and any time a critical incident occurs to them for a period of eight weeks.
Human subjects approval
Prior to any recruiting for this study, Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained by following the appropriate procedure for human subjects research. The principal investigator completed the required Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) Protection of Human Research Subjects online training course. IRB templates for study protocols and informed consent are being used. For example, participants will be reminded that they can discontinue their engagement with the study at any time for any reason. This study (ID STUDY00012239) received IRB approval as an exempt research on August 13, 2021.