As globalization intensies, human capitdemand for international talent forces rmemployees beyond the boundaries of a partito recruit the right people in foreign count(Collings, Scullion & Morley, 2007; Sculliondevelop local managers are the twomajor re

r a naol of pcapitats' jobing o

organizations face the challenge of conicting requirements from global standardization and local customization, which has crucial

Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Human Resource Management Review

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r.com/ locate /humresimplications for HR functions. Prior cross-cultural studies show that people fromdifferent cultural backgrounds tend to have differentvalues leading to different behaviors (Adler, 1997; Hofstede, 2001; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005; Triandis, 1989, 2003). For example,marketing research has found that consumers respondmore positively to advertisingmessages that are congruentwith their culturalvalues (Zhang & Gelb,1996). In addition, advertisements are more persuasive to consumers when rms take cultural differences intoconsideration (Gregory & Munch, 1997; Han & Shavitt, 1994). This impact of cultural values in organizational settings is also widelyshown by prior research on topics such as organizational structure (Kirkman & Shapiro, 1997) and organizational strategy and trust(e.g. Doney, Cannon, &Mullen,1998; Schneider & DeMeyer,1991). Previous literature on international HR has also supported the ideathat national cultural values have an impact on HR practices such as selection, compensation, and turnover (Cable & Judge, 1994;Johnson & Droege, 2004; Posthuma, Joplin, & Maertz, 2005; Ramamoorthy & Carroll, 1998; Schuler & Rogovsky, 1998). However, weVarious factorsmay impact applicanvaluable insights into our understandknow very little about the effectiveness of re

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 901 216 6349.E-mail addresses: rongma@memphis.edu (R. Ma),

1 Tel.: +1 901 678 4729.

1053-4822/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Inc.doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.001pursuit decisions.We argue that theories describing national cultural values canprovidef recruitment and attraction. As businesses have transcended national boundaries,international competition for humanal has become a critical element for rm success (Kiessling & Harvey, 2005). Increasings and institutions to recruit engineers, scientists, managers, nurses, and other keycular country (Choi, Woods, & Murrmann, 2000; Trossman, 2002). Without the abilityries, multinational enterprises will not be able to keep their competitive advantages, 1994). Research has shown that internationalization and MNCs' failure to recruit andasons for the shortage of international talent (Scullion, 1994). In addition, a successfultion's economic growth due to the labor shortage in many countries (Becker, 1995).ersuasive communication, play an important role in attracting the right talent in thel.recruitment function is also critical foRecruitment functions, as a critical toRecruiting across cultures: A value-based model of recruitment

Rong Ma, David G. Allen 1

Department of Management, Fogelman College of Business and Economics, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

With globalization intensifying, knowledge of cultural differences becomes increasingly critical.In the area of recruitment, a cross-cultural knowledge base is vital as the demand forinternational talent poses escalating challenges to effectively attracting desirable applicants.However, we know very little about the effectiveness of recruitment practices across culturesbecause most studies have been conducted in the U.S. We propose a theoretical framework ofrecruitment exploring how cultural values inuence the effectiveness of recruitment practicesin different cultural contexts. We argue that cultural values may moderate relationshipsbetween recruitment practices and recruitment outcomes across all phases of the recruitmentprocess and suggest implications for future research directions.

2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:International recruitmentNational cultural values

1. Introductioncruitment practices across cultures (Ployhart, 2006).

dallen@memphis.edu (D.G. Allen).

All rights reserved.

Although recruitment communication is a form of advertising used by organizations to market themselves and their jobopportunities, national cultural values have seldom been applied to recruitment theory and research. Most recruitment literature isconned to the boundaries of the U.S. and has dealt with American applicants (e.g. Breaugh & Starke, 2000; Cable & Judge, 1994;Collins & Stevens, 2002; Stevens, 1997; Turban & Cable, 2003). Research comparing recruiting activities within different culturalcontexts remains scarce, and the possible effect of cultural values on recruitment remains under-addressed. Since national culturaldifferences constitute the major difculty in recruiting international talent and transferring recruitment methods to differentcontexts (Scullion, 1994), this critical contextual factor of recruitment merits extensive research attention.

Following Ployhart's (2006) call for research on the effectiveness of stafng practices across cultures, we integrate Hofstede'sframework of national cultural values with Barber's process model of recruitment to develop a cultural value-based model ofrecruitment (See Fig. 1). In this model, we identify the potential impact of Hofstede's ve dimensions of cultural values on therelationships between major recruitment elements and outcomes suggested by Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin, and Jones(2005) (i.e. job pursuit intentions, applicant intentions to pursue a job or remain in the applicant pool; organization attraction, theapplicants' overall evaluation of the attractiveness of the organization; acceptance intentions, the likelihood that an applicant willaccept the job offer if it is forthcoming; and job choice, the nal choice to accept a job offer if it is extended), across recruitmentphases (generating applicants, maintaining applicant status, and inuencing job choice decisions). Our purpose is to provide atheory-based framework to stimulate future research on the role of cultural values in international recruitment.

There are, of course, multiple perspectives and models of both the recruitment process and cultural values. We start withBarber's (1998) recruitment phases as a useful organizing framework because considering the recruitment process in this wayfocuses on the motivations and goals of both applicants and organizations across different stages and activities of recruitment.Thus, one of the key contributions of our framework is the explicit recognition that different aspects of culture are more or lessrelevant during different recruitment activities depending on the goals of the involved parties and the nature of their interactions.Since signicant differences in cultural values exist, substantial research has examined how these values are different based onvarious cultural dimensions (e.g. Gupta & House, 2004; Haire, Ghiselli, & Porter, 1966; Hofstede, 1980; Ronen & Shenkar, 1985;Schwartz, 1992; 1994). Among them, Hofstede (1980, 1984) has made the most comprehensive and clear-cut attempt todimensionalize cultural values (Schuler & Rogovsky, 1998; Shackleton & Ali, 1990; Triandis, 1982). This research is also the mostrobust in terms of the number of samples of national cultures (Smith, Dugan, & Trompenaars, 1996) and has had far greater impactthan other cultural studies (Sivakumar & Nakata, 2001). In addition, later studies have produced convergent results and lend

335R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346support for Hofstede's (1980) framework (Lim, Leung, Sia, & Lee, 2004; Smith & Bond, 1998). In the eld of international humanresource management, Hofstede's dimensions have also been found to be relevant in explaining differences in HR practices inmultinational companies (Ferner, 1997). In addition, based on survey data from both employees and managers in IBM, Hofstede'sframework provides a better t with our research model in terms of the context and the phenomenon we are interested in thanother cultural models focusing on leadership (e.g. GLOBE, House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004) or at an individuallevel of analysis (e.g. Schwartz, 1994).

Fig. 1. A value-based model of recruitment.

336 R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346In general, we suggest that certain cultural values interact with recruitment activities and process characteristics acrossrecruiting phases. By integrating Hofstede's framework of national culture with Barber's phases of recruitment, we extend theliterature on recruitment, particularly the effectiveness of recruitment practices, across cultures. However, we do not expect allcultural values to inuence every aspect of the recruitment process to the same degree or in the same way. Instead, we focus onapplicants' reactions that are most likely to be inuenced by culture because knowledge of these differences is critical for efcientrecruitment within a global context. In the following sections, we briey review the literature describing recruitment activities andcultural values and discuss a theoretical framework of how cultural values may inuence recruitment outcomes by integratingHofstede's framework with recruitment elements. Subsequently, theoretical and practical implications are provided.

2. A value-based model of recruitment

Recruitment activities are a process aimed at attracting applicants with required qualications and keeping them interested inthe organization so that they will accept a job offer when it is extended (Barber, 1998). Substantial research has been conducted onrecruitment due to its critical importance in bringing human capital into organizations (Barber, 1998). Specically, recruitmenttheorists have studied the effects of recruitment elements on both pre-hire and post-hire outcomes (e.g. Breaugh & Starke, 2000;Phillips, 1998; Premack & Wanous, 1985; Rynes & Barber, 1990; Rynes, 1991). In this study, we focus on the inuence of culturalvalues on the relationship between recruitment activities and the outcomes of recruiting efforts as suggested by Chapman et al.(2005), i.e. whether rms can attract enough applicants to apply for the job, avoid unwanted withdrawal of applicants, and nallyensure that desired applicants accept the offer. This is an important topic in the eld of recruitment because cultural values caninuence how applicants and potential applicants respond to recruitment practices. For example, Phillips and Gully (2002) haveshown that certain applicant reactions are systematically related to cultural values. In particular, applicants from collectivisticsocietieswill react differently to selection procedures from individualistic applicants. Therefore, lack of knowledge on the inuenceof cultural values can be a serious obstacle to achieving a better understanding of recruitment and to accomplishing effectiverecruitment in a global setting.

Studies on national culture suggest that national culture is a multi-level construct incorporating values, beliefs, andassumptions shared by a group (Hofstede, 2001; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). Values, dened as a broad tendency to prefer certainstates of affairs over others (Hofstede, 2001: p.5), are themost deeply-rooted core of national culture that are socially constructedfrom the very early years of an individual's life. Therefore, it is very difcult to change people's values after they have been formed(Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). Combining the results from the Chinese Culture Connection (1987), Hofstede's model includes vecultural dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualismcollectivism, masculinityfemininity, and long-termand short-term orientations (Hofstede, 1994; Hofstede, 2003; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005).

We propose that these ve dimensions will inuence job seeker reactions and decisions across the three phases of recruitment.In the generating applicants phase, organizations are most interested in attracting qualied applicants to the organization and itsopportunities. Cultural values are most likely to play a role in how potential applicants respond to initial communication methodsand messages. In the maintaining applicants phase, organizations are concerned about maintaining applicants' interest whilesimultaneously evaluating applicants for job and organizational suitability. Cultural values are most likely to play a role in howapplicants respond to assessment methods and other features of the stafng process. In the inuencing job choice phase,organizations have chosen the candidates believed to t best and hope that most of these candidates are equally positivelydisposed to the organization. Cultural values aremost likely to play a role in themost salient job and organizational attributes usedin decision-making, and the relative inuence of recruitment on job choice. These more specic effects of cultural values acrossrecruitment phases are illustrated in Fig. 2 and discussed below.

In particular, a key mechanism linking culture to the impact of recruitment activities on outcomes is signaling theory (Spence,1973). According to signaling theory, job seekers facing incomplete information will use whatever information they do have assignals regarding job and organization characteristics (Rynes, 1991). Culture may play a role in this process in at least three ways:by affecting what signals job seekers attend to; by inuencing how job seekers interpret the signals received from information andinteractions; and by affecting how these signals inuence reactions and decisions. Cultural values may also be important becausethe extent to which individuals perceive that their values t with those of the organization plays an important role in recruitment,as shown by research suggesting that personjob and personorganization t inuence organizational attraction and job choice(Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). The balance of the paper focuses on elaborating the effects of the ve culturaldimensions on the relationship between recruitment activities and recruitment outcomes.

2.1. Generating applicants

This phase of recruitment is the earliest one inwhich employers are trying to attract a sufcient number of applicants to choosefrom. Firms need to decide on the target applicant groups they want to attract and what devices or communication tools to use inorder to attract those desired applicants. The major recruiting outcomes in this phase are organization attraction and job pursuitintentions. Rynes (1991) has suggested that applicant intentions to pursue a job can be inuenced early in the recruitment process.In addition, how the organization approaches the applicants can inuence applicants' perception of the attractiveness of theorganization. Specically, Barber (1998) argues that choice of recruitment sources and recruitment materials can have a signicanteffect on applicant attraction. That is, the key question of this phase is what kind of recruitment sources andmaterials will result inmore favorable reactions from applicants, i.e. what kinds of signals do job seekers attend to and how do they respond to these

Fig.

2.Recruitm

entprocessmod

erated

bynation

alculturalvalues.

337R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346

338 R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346signals?While substantial research has examined the effect of recruitment sources andmaterials on recruitment effectiveness, thisresearch has largely not gone beyond the boundaries of the U.S.

2.1.1. Recruitment source formality and individualism/collectivismRecruitment sources have attracted substantial research interest regarding the relative effectiveness of various sources (Cober,

Brown, Keeping, & Levy, 2004; Gannon, 1971; Ryan & Ployhart, 2000; Taylor & Schmidt, 1983; Vecchio, 1995; Zottoli & Wanous,2000). In particular, prior studies provide various typologies of recruitment sources based on factors such as formality (e.g. Saks &Ashforth, 1997; Ullman, 1966), location of the sources (e.g. Quaglieri, 1982; Zottoli & Wanous, 2000), geographical focus (Rafaeli,Hadomi, & Simons, 2005), andmotivation (e.g. Breaugh &Mann,1984). Themost common dimension used to describe recruitmentsources is formality. Although few researchers provide denitions of formality, most agree that formal sources are those using aformal intermediary, such as job fairs and job postings in newspapers, while informal sources are those that use friends andrelatives, such as referrals (Saks & Ashforth, 1997).

It has been found that informal sources are related to more favorable post-hire outcomes than formal sources based onindividual differences or met expectations (Barber, 1998). On the other hand, recent research shows that recruitment sources alsoinuence pre-hire attraction (Allen, Van Scotter, & Otondo, 2004). Based on the difference between cultures along theindividualismcollectivism dimension, we focus on the effect of formality of recruitment sources on attraction in different cultures.Specically, we propose that the individualismcollectivism dimension can shed light on understanding the effect of sourceformality on pre-hire outcomes because job seekers from collectivistic cultures are likely to interpret signals from informal sourcesdifferently depending on the nature of the source.

The individualismcollectivism dimension is the key dimension of national cultural values and is most widely studied bytheorists (e.g. Chen, Chen, & Meindl, 1998; Earley & Gibson, 1998; Tiessen, 1997; Triandis, 2001; Wagner, 1995). In particular,individualistic societies value individuals for themselves as an independent entity. In contrast, collectivistic societies do notseparate individuals from groups and other individuals. Perceptions of an individual's self are interdependent with the groups towhich he or she belongs. Moreover, people value the interests of the group more than their own. They are evenwilling to sacricetheir ownwelfare for the group (Chen, Peng, & Saparito, 2002). This difference in perception of self has critical implications on theindividual use of social networks, an important channel through which individuals look for jobs (Marsden & Gorman, 2001).

Network research shows that there are two types of interpersonal ties, strong ties andweak ties (Granovetter,1973). Strong tiesare those among intimate friends and relatives with high levels of trust. Weak ties, on the contrary, refer to infrequent and low-intimacy relationships. Although both strong and weak ties can be friends or relatives, the major difference of the two lies inwhether the relationship is an intimate one with frequent interaction and trust. In collectivistic societies, individuals focus ongroup membership and differentiate more strongly between in-group and out-groupmembers, favoring in-groupmembers (Chenet al., 2002). More important, while individuals feel socially responsible for in-group members and are evenwilling to sacrice forgroup interests, moral exclusion may occur when dealing with out-group members (Chen et al., 2002). In contrast, people do notdifferentiate in-group and out-group members as much in individualistic cultures since they have a focus on the individual ratherthan the group. Based on different perceptions of in-group and out-group members, reconsideration of informal recruitmentsources may be desired. Although some of the most consistent ndings in recruitment research are the favorable outcomesassociated with recruiting through employee referrals, in collectivistic cultures these effects may be more dependent on context.

In a recruitment context, contacts with strong ties may be viewedmore similarly to in-groupmembers and contacts with weakties share more features of out-group members such as relatively lower levels of trust and intimacy. In collectivistic cultures,different informal sources may tend to have very different meanings for applicants depending on their group membership, without-group members less likely to be viewed as credible attractive sources of job information (Chen et al., 2002). Therefore, jobapplicants might regard strong ties, such as close friends and relatives, as more reliable and attractive recruitment sources thanweak ties, such as acquaintances or professional contacts who are regarded as out-groupmembers. That is, strong tie contacts maybe preferred in collectivistic cultures when individuals are looking for jobs. For example, Bian and Ang (1997) nd that most of thejob mobility in two highly collectivistic countries, China and Singapore, is facilitated through strong ties. Alternatively, because theU.S. is a highly individualistic culture, different types of informal referral sources, such as close friends, relatives, or someone theapplicant is just acquainted with are likely seen as equally credible and attractive sources of job information. That is to say, whilejob applicants may not differentiate strong versus weak informal contacts in individualistic cultures, informal sources that are alsostrong ties are perceived as more attractive than weak ties in collectivistic cultures.

P1. The positive relationship between informal sources and job pursuit intentions will be strengthened by tie strength in collectivisticcultures.

2.1.2. Recruitment sources and power distanceOther classications of recruitment sources than formality have been offered. Breaugh and Mann (1984) pointed out that

whether the organization or the applicant initiates recruitment efforts can predict later performance. That is, rms can activelycontact applicants through the use of more active sources such as job fairs and search rms, or leave it to applicants to initiateefforts to look for information about the rm's job opportunities through the use of passive sources such as job postings innewspapers or on the internet. Applicants who actively look for employment tend to be more highly motivated to perform thanthosewhomerely react to rm recruitment efforts. This implies motivational difference in how applicants respond to active versuspassive recruiting sources. We propose that masculinity/femininity may inuence applicants' reaction to active and passive

339R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346recruitment sources because culture may affect the likelihood of attending to signals from passive recruitment sources, and mayalso affect how active recruitment is perceived.

The masculinity/femininity dimension refers to the extent to which a society values masculine behaviors. In masculinecultures, assertiveness, ambition, successful achievement, performance, excellence, dominance, and competition are valued andgender roles are unequal (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). In feminine cultures, individuals give more attention to relationalconsiderations and emphasize harmony among individuals and groups. Gender roles are equal and emphasis is on quality of life,welfare of others, and sympathy for the weak.

Within the context of recruitment, individuals in masculine cultures may be more active in initiating the search to fulll theirambition and achieve success. Active job search on the part of the applicants may be the norm. Therefore, whether organizations takeanactiveor passive approachmayhave less impactonwhether job seekers are exposed to recruitment information since applicants arelikely to uncover relevant informationon their own.Alternatively, individuals in feminine culturesmaybemuch less active in initiatingsearch efforts due to their emphasis on quality of life; constant job scanning to maximize career opportunities is less likely to be thenorm. To reach applicants in this context, employers need to havemore active and systematic recruiting sources, such as search rmsand job fairs; otherwise many potential employees will never be exposed to recruitment messages. That is, potential applicants infeminine cultures are less likely to attend to the signals provided by passive recruitment sources than those in masculine cultures.

Because the United States is a masculine culture (Davis, Schoorman, & Donaldson, 1997), job seekers are likely to discoverrelevant job information on their own and may even prefer to actively discover recruitment information themselves. Passiverecruiting sources, such as job postings, work for such individuals, and indeed newspaper ads and internet job boards arewidespread methods of nding jobs in the U.S. However, to recruit applicants from feminine cultures, these passive recruitmentsources might not be as effective. In more feminine cultures, rms may need to more actively target and pursue applicants, pushrm information to those applicants, and encourage them to apply for jobs.

P2a. Active recruiting sources will be more positively related to applicants' job pursuit intentions than passive recruiting sources infeminine cultures than in masculine cultures.

At the same time, the masculinity/femininity dimension of culture may inuence how job seekers perceive the organization inresponse to active versus passive recruitment methods. In general, active recruitment methods may be seen as more attractivebecause they entail more aggressively pursuing job seekers leading to a sense that applicants are highly valued. However, activerecruitment methods may be relatively more attractive in masculine cultures. Since active recruiting practices are congruent withthe expectations and emphasis of masculine culture, they may act as an important signal to the applicant about the organization.That is, active recruitment efforts may be perceived as a sign by the applicant of an aggressive organization concerned aboutsuccess. Thus, individuals from a more masculine culture may perceive a better t with the values of organizations thataggressively recruit them; this active approach may not increase applicant perceptions of organization attractiveness in morefeminine cultures since aggressiveness is not valued in such cultures.

P2b. Active recruiting sources will be more positively related to organization attraction than passive recruiting sources in masculinecultures than in feminine cultures.

2.1.3. Recruitment materials and individualism/collectivismAnother major issue to be considered in this phase is the design of recruitment materials. Recruitment materials provide

applicants with information about the job and the organization and offer important signals about what it would be like to workthere. Previous research has shown that the style and content of recruitment materials can have a major impact on applicants'decisions on whether to apply for a job or not (Barber, 1998).

In particular, cultural values have been found to inuence the effect of recruitment materials on applicants' decision to apply interms of pay structure. In studying compensation information in recruitment materials, Cable and Judge (1994) found that culturalvalues inuence applicants' attraction to recruitment materials such that job seekers in individualistic cultures tend to favorindividual-based pay more. This is because in individualistic cultures, such as the U.S., individual perceptions of self areindependent of other individuals, and his or her relationship with others is not as close. By contrast, in collectivistic culturesindividuals value others' perception and do not separate themselves from the group to which they belong. They feel comfortableworking with others and are more likely to be inuenced by feelings of belongingness (Robert & Wasti, 2002). For example,Kirkman and Shapiro (1997) found that there is more resistance towards working teams in individualistic cultures than incollectivistic cultures. Therefore, to attract applicants in collectivistic cultures, rms may need to address group-orientedinformation, such as reward systems based on group performance instead of individual performance, and structures based onteamwork. Alternatively, in individualistic societies, individual-oriented content, such as clear emphasis on rewarding individualefforts, may be perceived as more attractive. In addition, recruitment material focus may inuence applicants' perceptions oforganization attractiveness because the content signals the congruence or incongruence of values in terms of job and organizationcharacteristics such as reward systems. These perceptions of congruence or incongruence likely depend a great deal on the jobseeker's cultural lens and lead to perceptions of t that are strongly related to organizational attraction (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005).

P3a. Recruitment materials that focus on group-oriented content will be more positively related to applicants' job pursuit intentions andorganization attraction in collectivistic cultures.

340 R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346P3b. Recruitment materials that focus on individual-oriented content will be more positively related to applicants' job pursuit intentionsand organization attraction in individualistic cultures.

2.2. Maintaining applicant status

At this stage of recruitment, organizations have successfully attracted applications from potential employees. Applicants andemployersmay have their rst face-to-face contacts, and applicants can have the opportunity to developmore in-depth knowledgeabout the organization through site visits and interviews with recruiters and even future colleagues. Thus, the signals sent by theorganization and its agents may be seen as evenmore representative of the work environment. For employers, this is a crucial steptoward persuading the most promising candidates to choose their organization since those candidates tend to be also sought afterby other organizations. According to Barber et al. (1994), one third of the applicants withdraw from the selection process after theinterview. Therefore, this phase is of great importance for effective recruitment. According to Chapman et al. (2005), organizationattraction and acceptance intentions are two important outcome variables in this phase.

Prior literature focuses on two issues in this phase, interviews and administrative procedures (specically, time lags and delays)after interviews. Concerning interviews, researchers have studied the focus of the interview (Rynes, 1989; Taylor & Bergmann,1987), interview structure (Taylor & Bergmann, 1987; Turban & Dougherty, 1992), and interview content (Taylor & Sniezek, 1984),and their effects on recruitment outcomes such as applicants' acceptance of an offer. We focus on the interactive effects of culturewith interview structure and with communication lags.

2.2.1. Interview structure and power distanceAccording to Barber (1998), structured interviews are controlled by recruiters and consist of systematic interview questions.

Therefore, applicants aremore inuenced by the recruiter. In less structured interviews, on the other hand, recruiters do not dictatethe interview process and allow the interviewees to participate in deciding the topics, the order of the topics, and time devoted tothe topics discussed. Power distance may be an important factor in understanding the effect of interview structure on jobapplicants since individuals in low or high power distance cultures desire different levels of autonomy in making decisions, whichmay lead to different reactions to the interview structure. Reactions to interview structure based on cultural values can inuenceapplicants' perception of organizational attractiveness through meeting applicant expectations, signaling, and inuencingperceived personorganization t.

Hofstede denes power distance as the extent to which a society accepts the fact that power in institutions and organizationsis distributed unequally (Hofstede, 1980, p.45). Therefore, power distance deals with the issue of social equality and inequality,and the perceived power possessed by people at different social levels. For cultures with low power distance, people tend to desireautonomy and discretion and have little concern for social status and formality (Adler, 1997). Individuals value systems that aremore egalitarian and perceive others more as counterparts with whom they can communicate equally. In work life, Adler (1997)found that it is typical for individuals within this type of culture to make decisions for the organization without consulting theirsuperiors. Therefore, in the context of recruitment, individuals may expect recruitment activities to allow them to accessinformationwith more discretion so that they can determine what information is of more value to them as opposed to dependingon the employers to decide what they should know. This is the case of the U.S. where most of the research on interview structurehas been conducted (e.g. Chapman & Rowe, 2002; Taylor & Bergmann, 1987; Turban & Dougherty, 1992). In general, the empiricalevidence collected supports this argument and indicates that applicants tend to have negative reactions towards highly structuredinterviews (Chapman & Rowe, 2002; Chapman & Zweig, 2005; Hysong & Dipboye, 1999; Kohn, & Dipboye, 1998; Latham &Finnegan, 1993).

On the contrary, individuals whose values are formed in cultures with high power distance assume that people have differentlevels of power and respect this difference. They feel uncomfortable in discretionary decisions and expect individuals at highersocial levels to take the lead (Adler, 1997). Hierarchical structures are the norm in this type of society (Hofstede, 1980). Whenreacting to recruitment efforts, applicants may perceive recruiters as representatives of organizations who possess higher socialstatus based on authority and professional knowledge. These perceptions can lead individuals in high power distance cultures torespect the power and opinions of the recruiters to a greater extent. Recruiters are thus more likely to be treated as the authorityand as experts who are expected to control the interview process. Therefore, in high power distance cultures, an informal two-waycommunication with no clear structure may negatively inuence applicants' perception of the organization.

In addition to the inuence on organizational attraction, cultural valuesmay also affect applicants' acceptance intentions. Basedon the attractionselectionattrition model, Schneider (1987) suggested that the perceived similarity between the person and thework environment determines attraction to, selection into, and remaining in an organization. Previous literature conrms thisargument and nds that when applicants perceive higher level of t with the organization, they are more likely to intend to acceptthe organization's job offer (Bretz & Judge, 1994) and view the organization as more attractive (Bretz, Ash, & Dreher, 1989; Carless,2005).

P4a. More structured interviews will be positively related to organizational attraction and applicants' acceptance intentions in cultureswith high power distance.

P4b. Less structured interviews will be positively related to organizational attraction and applicants' acceptance intentions in cultureswith low power distance.

341R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 3343462.2.2. Communication delay and uncertainty avoidanceAnother important issue during this phase is the possibility of time lags between steps in the recruitment process. Based on the

qualications of applicants, employers make decisions about whether applicants should continue in the process and whether tooffer an applicant a position. This process of decision-making takes some time, during which the applicant also has the chance toreconsider the employer based on further information from the stafng experience. The time lag and communication delays duringthis process can have an impact on applicant attraction reected in outcomes such as dropouts (Arvey, Gordon, Massengill, &Mussio, 1975). Rynes, Bretz, and Gerhart (1991) reported that communication delays have a negative effect on applicants'willingness to accept eventual offers. This may be because delays are seen as signals of both the likelihood of receiving an offer andof organizational competence. Theorists also suggest that more desirable applicants tend to have lower tolerance forcommunication delays (Thurow, 1975) since they have more opportunities and are less willing to wait. Taking cultural valuesinto consideration, the effects of time lag may also have different effects on applicants in diverse cultures.

Breaugh (1992)has suggested that uncertaintyavoidance canbe agood reason fororganizations tomake timelyoffers to applicants.Members of lowuncertainty avoidance societies aremore tolerant of uncertain situations (Hofstede&Hofstede, 2005). They tend to bewilling to take risks and feel more at ease dealing with unpredictable futures. This value system may foster a better environment forchange and innovation (Geletkanycz, 1997). Research ndings in the U.S., which is characterized with a moderate to low level ofuncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 1991), suggest that communication delays are negatively perceived. We argue that the negativeimpact of communication delays on recruiting outcomes may be more pronounced in cultures with high uncertainty avoidance.

Hofstede and Hofstede (2005) suggest that members of cultures with high uncertainty avoidance are likely to feeluncomfortable with uncertain situations. They prefer structure, organization, and standardization to avoid uncertain events andhave low levels of tolerance for uncertainty (Hofstede,1980). This cultural value system tends to be associated with higher levels ofdifculty embracing and encouraging innovations (Mueller & Thomas, 2001). In the recruitment process, longer delays create anambiguous context that may be intolerable in high uncertainty avoidance cultures. Therefore, a structured recruitment systemwould be preferred and employers are more likely to be expected to comply with norms in communication time lags. In addition,Rynes et al. (1991) found that applicants, especially those with better qualications, will perceive recruitment delay as a sign oforganizational inefciency, which may be exacerbated in high uncertainty avoidance cultures where structure and efciency helpto reduce ambiguity. Therefore, the delay may result in lower acceptance intentions and decreased organizational attraction insuch cultures.

P5. Communication delays in a recruitment process will be more negatively related to organizational attraction and applicantacceptance intentions in high uncertainty avoidance cultures than in low uncertainty avoidance cultures.

2.3. Inuencing job choice

This is the nal stage of the recruitment process at which the offer has been extended and the applicant must make a decisionwhether to accept the offer (Barber,1998). Therefore, themajor recruiting outcome at this stage is the actual job choice. Job choice is afunction of objective factors, such as job attributes, subjective factors, such as personorganization t, and critical contacts, such asinteractionwith recruiters. A major issue the applicant considers in making a job choice decision is the content of the job offer, whichcan include objective factors, such as pay, vacation, and job title, and subjective factors, such as personorganizationt and personjobt (Behling, Labovitz & Gainer, 1968). In studying job offers, researchers have investigated how individuals give priority to differentattributes (Bretz et al., 1989; Bretz & Judge, 1994; Cable & Judge, 1996; Jurgensen, 1978; Lacy, Bokemeier, & Shepard, 1983; Lacy et al.,1983; Turban, Eyring & Campion, 1993). Specically, prior studies indicate that job attributes inuence job acceptance more thanrecruitment practices (Boswell, Roehling, LePine, & Moynihan, 2003; Powell, 1984; Taylor & Bergmann, 1987). Because most of thisresearch has been conducted within the U.S., which is characterized with certain underlying cultural values, we assert that theexploration of potential effects of cultural values will enhance our understanding of the relationship between job attributes andapplicants' job choice decisions. In particular, the dimensions of masculinityfemininity and long-term or short-term focus mayinuence the manner in which signals from job offers interact with applicants' preferences for different job attributes.

2.3.1. Job attributes and masculinity/femininityAs suggestedearlier, researchsuggests that personorganizationt can inuence applicants' jobpursuit intentions (Chapmanet al.,

2005). That is, individual attitudes and behaviors can be affected by the congruence between individual attributes and theenvironment (Pervin, 1989; Schneider, 1987). Therefore, cultural differences, as an important contextual variable (Cable & Edwards,2004), may play an important role in how individuals perceive their t with the job and the organization, and which job andorganization attributes are most salient in inuencing their job pursuit intentions. Most previous research in this area has beenconducted in theU.S., a culture highonmasculinity. In this type of culture, people tend to emphasize outcomes, value competition, andappreciate aggressiveness. In a job choice decision-making process, the strong emphasis on results may lead people into consideringobjective factors such as salary and job title as more important. Chapman et al. (2005) echo this argument and nd that objectivefactors are important determinants of applicant attraction and play a more signicant role when job choice is considered.

Feminine cultures, on the other hand, give priority to relationships and to quality of life. Individuals are trying to maintaininterpersonal ties and social relations and regard the harmony of relations as more important. In reacting to job offers, individualswith an emphasis on relational aspects will likely pay more attention to subjective factors such as personjob t and personorganization t since achieving harmony in life is more important for them.

342 R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346P6a. Objective factors, such as job attributes, will be more positively related to applicants' job choice in masculine cultures than infeminine cultures.

P6b. Subjective factors, such as personorganization t, will be more positively related to applicants' job choice in feminine culturesthan in masculine cultures.

2.3.2. Recruitment/recruiter inuence and masculinity/femininityConsidering that applicants have limited information about the organization (Rynes, 1991), recruiters and recruitment

activities are an important source from which applicants obtain signals about the organization. Prior research has shown thatrecruiter behavior can inuence applicant attraction because recruiters are regarded as the representative of the organization(Harn & Thornton, 1985; Ralston & Brady, 1994). Applicants may interpret recruiter behaviors or recruitment characteristics assignals of unknown organizational attributes (Rynes, 1991). For example, prepared recruiters will be related with overallorganizational efciency; recruiter affect may be a symbol of organizational culture. However, most prior studies found that theimpact of recruiter and recruitment activities on job choice is small or in some cases not signicant. This pattern of ndingsmay bedue to the specic cultural context where the prior studies have been conducted.

As noted earlier, in masculine cultures people value aggressiveness and ambition. Emphasis is thus on outcomes more thanrelationships. Beyond the function of signaling unknown information, recruiters and the recruitment practices in this context mayhave little impact on applicants' job choice because job seekers may tend to focus on objective job characteristics. In contrast,feminine societies give priority to relationships and harmony. In the recruitment process, this implies an emphasis on relationalaspects, which can be inuenced largely by the recruiter and recruitment interactions. Beyond providing hard to obtaininformation about the organization, recruiters can also begin the process of relationship-building with others in the organizationduring the recruitment process, which would be highly valued in feminine cultures. This differing emphasis on outcomescompared to relationships may explain why job attributes are more important in attracting applicants and inuencing job choicethan recruitment activities in the U.S. (Chapman et al., 2005; Rynes, 1991), a society which is high in masculinity. We suggest thatthe role of recruiters and recruitment interactions may be relatively more important in feminine cultures.

P7. Recruitment activities and recruiters will be more strongly related to applicants' job choice in feminine cultures than masculinecultures.

2.3.3. Job attributes and long-term/short-term orientationIn addition to masculinityfemininity, the dimension of long-term versus short-term orientation can also help in identifying

applicants' preference for different job attributes. In particular, there are two types of objective factors. Extrinsic job attributes aretangible factors such as pay, company policies, working conditions, and status. Intrinsic job attributes, on the other hand, are lesstangible, suchas achievement, possibilityof growth, and advancementopportunities (Tietjen&Myers,1998).Weassert that long-termand short-term orientations can make a difference in inuencing applicants' preference for different types of objective job attributes.

The long-term/short-term orientation focuses on individuals' perception of time, and is concerned with whether peopleemphasize the future, the present, or the past. In long-term oriented cultures, individuals emphasize the future and are willing tosacrice present benets for future welfare. For example, in China, a culture characterized with long-term values (Hofstede, 1991),workers tend to be motivated more by long-term objectives, such as training opportunities (Terence & Bak, 1998) and put lowpriority on pay, benets, working conditions, and convenient working hours (Elizur, Borg, Hunt, & Beck,1991). Alternatively, short-term oriented cultures, such as the U.S., place more emphasis on the present and the past (Hofstede, 1993). Society members tendto focus more on what they possess and experience at the present time than in the future. Current achievement is valued(Hofstede,1991). Therefore, individuals tend to bemotivatedmore by extrinsic factors. As such, we argue that time orientation caninuence applicants' job choice through their preference for different job attributes. In long-term oriented cultures, applicantsprefer job attributes that stress intrinsic factors, such as possible growth opportunities. In short-term oriented cultures, in contrast,applicants are more attracted by attributes featuring extrinsic factors, such as status and pay.

P8a. Job attributes featuring intrinsic factors will be more positively related to applicants' job choice in long-term oriented cultures.

P8b. Job attributes featuring extrinsic factors will be more positively related to applicants' job choice in short-term oriented cultures.

3. Discussion and conclusion

In this article, we examine the role of cultural values and reveal potential key boundary conditions for the application of widelyused recruitment frameworks in a cross-cultural context. In developing this framework, we draw on established research from theelds of recruitment and national culture and argue that cultural context makes a difference in the effectiveness of recruitmentactivities. This model has a variety of important implications.

3.1. Theoretical contributions

Our model contributes to recruitment theory by introducing cultural differences into recruitment research. IntegratingHofstede's framework of national cultural values extends the current understanding of recruitment to new contexts with different

343R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346underlying values. Identifying important boundary conditions of current recruitment theory and research will hopefully guidefuture theory and empirical work to hone our understanding of organizational attractiveness and job choice decisions in anincreasingly globalized world of work.

We also extend the application of signaling theory to recruitment, providing greater depth to the mechanisms through whichrecruitment processes inuence prospective applicants, and explicitly describing how the same process may be interpreted orresponded to differently depending on contextual factors such as national culture. We suggest that the consideration of culturalvaluesmay inuence the predictions of signaling theory because job applicants within different cultural contexts may interpret theinformation and signals in a different way based on their values and beliefs. This possibility suggests that we may need to includeboundary conditions, such as national culture, when applying signaling theory to recruitment. Further, cultural considerationsmaylead to meaningful discussions of other recruitment frameworks and major theoretical perspectives. For example, cultural valuesmay inuence the application of expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) in the context of recruitment research, a widely usedexplanatory model of job choice (Barber, 1998). Job applicants from different cultural contexts may allocate the same recruitmentfeatures with different levels of instrumentality or valence, resulting in different levels of job pursuit.

Incorporating national cultural values into recruitment research also raises possibilities for considering other aspects of cultureor context. For example, communication media could represent a contextual factor that inuences the effectiveness of recruitmentpractices (e.g., web-based recruitment: Allen, Mahto, & Otondo, 2007; Dineen, Ash, & Noe, 2002). In addition, rm size has beensuggested as an important contextual factor explaining the differences in recruitment activities (Barber,Wesson, Roberson, & Taylor,1999). In a similar vein, sub-cultures based on factors such as generation and ethnicity (Egri & Ralston, 2004; Goldberg & Allen,2008; Webster, 1992) may also function as critical contextual factors. Similar to marketing research that focuses on understandingthe characteristics of target markets, recruitment research may also need to examine the characteristics of target applicant poolsand formulate recruitment strategies based on those characteristics. That is, there may be multiple levels of culture that inuencethe recruitment process, e.g. national, regional, occupational, ethnic, etc. This is an important issue since a better understanding ofthe context of recruitmentmayofferrms a competitive advantage in attracting talent in amore effective fashion.We suggest that itis also important to examine the potential interactive effects of different contextual variables since rms' recruitment practices areinuenced by various contextual constraints and opportunities. For example, cultural values may interact with organizationalcontextual variables, such as rm size, and inuence the choice and effectiveness of recruitment sources.

It is also our hope that this paper will encourage empirical studies to test our ideas and examine related topics. We haveprovided a number of testable research propositions to help stimulate work in this area. An important issue to consider inempirical tests is data equivalence, which refers to the extent to which the elements of a research design have the same meaningand can be applied in the same fashion in different cultural contexts (Hult et al., 2008). For example, organization attraction mayhave different meanings for applicants from different cultural contexts. Therefore, equivalence may be an important issue to beestablished before inferences can be made. This has implications for the understanding of the construct, measurement of relevantvariables and the data collection process since failure to establish data equivalence can bias the empirical results and subsequenttheoretical inferences (Hult et al., 2008).

We have focused on the impact of cultural values on the effectiveness of recruitment, that is, how cultural values mightinuence the attractiveness of employers and the successful recruitment of qualied employees through the incorporation of apre-hire outcome model proposed by Chapman et al. (2005). For future research, it will also be helpful to explore the inuence ofcultural values beyond pre-hire outcome variables and investigate the impact on other recruitment related outcome variables, suchas job performance and retention. For example, Zottoli and Wanous (2000) suggested the socialization process as a potentialexplanation for performance difference for employees recruited from different sources. In particular, employees recruited fromreferrals may receive more help and become more committed to the organization based on a more personalized socializationprocess than those recruited from advertisements (McManus & Baratta, 1992; Skolnik, 1987). It is reasonable to expect that thiseffect of the socialization process may be stronger for collectivistic cultures since it may inuence the employee's perception ofgroup membership. Based on in-group membership, individuals in collectivistic cultures are more concerned with collectiveinterests, which may in turn impact subsequent performance, embeddedness, and turnover decisions.

Finally, we chose to focus on the cultural dimensions associated with Hofstede's work and to position their effects acrossrecruitment phases as described by Barber (1998). However, there are other perspectives on important cultural differences andother ways of describing the recruitment process, and wemake no claim these other frameworks are somehow less relevant to theissue of cross-cultural recruitment. Quite the contrary, we hope that our model of applying specic well-researched culturaldimensions to understanding specic recruitment processes and activities can be used by others to broaden our understanding ofthese issues even further. However, we believe that given the widespread research on Hofstede's cultural dimensions and thestraightforward utility of considering the changing motivations and concerns of participants across Barber's recruitment phases,these perspectives provide a solid jumping off point for considering cross-cultural recruitment.

3.2. Managerial implications

Finally, to the extent empirical research supports our propositions, several recommendations for HR management can bederived from our value-based framework of recruitment. Understanding the dynamics and inuence of cultural values onrecruitment is critical to successfully garnering the best human resources globally. Although prior research has offered usefulinsights on how to recruit more effectively, our study suggests that adapting recruitment activities to the requirements of thespecic cultural context may be a key to successful international recruitment practice. For example, our analysis shows that while

344 R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346the distinction between informal and formal recruitment sources is sufcient for individualistic cultures, a closer look at informalsources may be desired for recruiting employees in collectivistic cultures. That is, HR managers may need to be more active increating opportunities to establish strong tie connections and make more efforts in cultivating relationships with potentialqualied candidates. Also, western organizations operating in this context may need to relax norms against the hiring of family andclose friends.

Furthermore, we also suggest that the inuence of certain recruitment elements may be amplied in certain cultures; forexample, the negative effects of communication delays on organization attraction and applicant acceptance intention in highuncertainty avoidance cultures. Managers in these culturesmay nd it evenmore important to streamline the recruitment process.

Our framework also suggests that there are situations when certain recruitment activities that are effective in one culture couldbe counter-productive in a different culture. For example, highly structured interviews have been found to be negatively related toorganization attraction (Chapman & Rowe, 2002; Hysong & Dipboye, 1999; Kohn, & Dipboye, 1998; Latham & Finnegan, 1993).Taking power distance into consideration, our analysis indicates that structured interviews may be more effective (in terms ofmaintaining applicant interest) in high power distance cultures. Similarly, recruitment materials with a strong individual focuscould have a negative impact on applicant job pursuit intention and organization attraction for collectivistic cultures; recruitmentcontent in this settingmay get better results by emphasizing group-oriented themes such as teamwork or group prot sharing. Ouranalysis also suggests that masculinity/femininity and long-term/short-term orientations may result in different sets and types ofjob features that positively inuence applicants' nal job choices. For example, job offers in more feminine cultures may havebetter results by emphasizing subjective factors such as t, organizational culture, and relationships, while those in more long-term oriented culturesmay have better results by emphasizing intrinsic growth-related attributes. Therefore, HRmanagers need tobe cautious about standardization of recruitment practice when recruiting across cultures.

Adding to the complexity involved in international recruitment, particular recruitment activitiesmay have conicting effects ondifferent pre-hire outcomes in different cultures. For instance, while active recruitment sources may increase applicants' jobpursuit intention by reaching more applicants in feminine cultures, this type of recruitment activity may not positively inuenceorganization attraction in this context. This potential trade-off may make recruitment a more demanding task and requires HRmanagement to better understand the recruitment process and the relative signicance of each element.

3.3. Conclusion

In short, our analysis suggests that recruitment within a global context is a complex issue and HRmanagers need to be careful incarrying out recruitment activities in different cultural contexts. National culture may be an important moderator of relationshipsbetween recruitment activities and outcomes across all phases of the recruitment process. By taking different cultural values intoconsideration, rms may be able to have an advantage over competitors when building up the most important resources oforganizations, their people.

References

Adler, N. J. (1997). International dimensions of organizational behavior, (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.Allen, D. G., Mahto, R., & Otondo, R. F. (2007). Web-based recruitment: Effects of information, organizational brand, and attitudes toward a Web site on applicant

attraction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 16961708.Allen, D. G., Van Scotter, J. R., & Otondo, R. F. (2004). Recruitment communication media: Impact on prehire outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 57, 143171.Arvey, R. D., Gordon, M. E., Massengill, D. P., & Mussio, S. J. (1975). Differential dropout rates of minority and majority job candidates due to time lags between

selection procedures. Personnel Psychology, 28(2), 175180.Barber, A. E. (1998). Recruiting employees. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Barber, A. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Tower, S. L., & Phillips, J. M. (1994). The effects of interview focus on recruitment effectiveness: A eld experiment. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 79, 886896.Barber, A. E., Wesson, M. J., Roberson, Q. M., & Taylor, M. S. (1999). A tale of two job markets: Organizational size and its effects on hiring practices and job search

behavior. Personnel Psychology, 52, 841867.Becker, G. S. (1995). Human capital and poverty alleviation, World Bank, Human Resources Development and Operations Policy.Behling, O., Labovitz, G., & Gainer, M. (1968). College recruiting: A theoretical base. Personnel Journal, 47, 1319.Bian, Y., & Ang, S. (1997). Guanxi networks and job mobility in China and Singapore. Social Forces, 75, 9811005.Boswell,W. R., Roehling, M. V., LePine, M. A., &Moynihan, L. M. (2003). Individual job-choice decisions and the impact of job attributes and recruitment practices: A

longitudinal eld study. Human Resource Management, 42, 2337.Breaugh, J. A. (1992). Recruitment: science and practice. Boston: PWS-Kent.Breaugh, J. A., & Starke, M. (2000). Research on employee recruitment: So many studies, so many remaining questions. Journal of Management, 26(3), 405434.Breaugh, J. A., & Mann, R. B. (1984). Recruiting source effects: A test of two alternative explanations. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 57, 261267.Bretz, R. D., Jr., Ash, R. A., & Dreher, G. F. (1989). Do people make the place? An examination of the attractionselectionattrition hypothesis. Personnel Psychology,

42(3), 561581.Bretz, R. D., Jr., & Judge, T. A. (1994). The role of human resource systems in job applicant decision processes. Journal of Management, 20(3), 531551.Cable, D. M., & Edwards, J. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary t: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 822834.Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Pay preferences and job search decisions: A personorganization t perspective. Personnel Psychology, 47(2), 317348.Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Personorganization t, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 67

(3), 294311.Carless, S. A. (2005). Personjob t versus personorganisation t as predictors of organizational attraction and job acceptance intentions: A longitudinal study.

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 411429.Chapman, D. S., & Rowe, P. M. (2002). The inuence of videoconference technology and interview structure on the recruiting function of the employment

interview: A eld experiment. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, 185197.Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic review of

the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 928944.

345R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346Chapman, D. S., & Zweig, D. I. (2005). Developing a nomological network for interview structure: Antecedents and consequences of the structured selectioninterview. Personnel Psychology, 58, 673702.

Chen, C. C., Chen, X. P., & Meindl, J. R. (1998). How can cooperation be fostered? The cultural effects of individualismcollectivism. Academy of Management Review,23(2), 285304.

Chen, C. C., Peng, M. W., & Saparito, P. A. (2002). Individualism, collectivism, and opportunism: A cultural perspective on transaction cost economics. Journal ofManagement, 28(4), 567583.

Chinese Culture Connection (1987). Chinese values and the search for culture-free dimensions of culture. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18(2), 143164.Choi, J. G., Woods, R. H., &Murrmann, S. K. (2000). International labor markets and the migration of labor forces as an alternative solution for labor shortages in the

hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 12(1), 6167.Cober, R. T., Brown, D. J., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2004). Recruitment on the net: Howdo organizational web site characteristics inuence applicant perceptions?

Journal of Management, 30, 623646.Collings, D. G., Scullion, H., & Morley, M. J. (2007). Changing patterns of global stafng in the multinational enterprise: Challenges to the conventional expatriate

assignment and emerging alternatives. Journal of World Business, 42(2), 198213.Collins, C. J., & Stevens, C. K. (2002). The relationship between early recruitment-related activities and the application decisions of new labor-market entrants: A

brand equity approach to recruitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 11211133.Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 2047.Dineen, B. R., Ash, S. R., & Noe, R. A. (2002). A web of applicant attraction: Personorganization t in the context of web-based recruitment. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 87(4), 723734.Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P., & Mullen, M. R. (1998). Understanding the inuence of national culture on the development of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23

(3), 601620.Earley, P. C., & Gibson, C. B. (1998). Taking stock in our progress on individualismcollectivism: 100 years of solidarity and community. Journal of Management, 24

(3), 265304.Egri, C., & Ralston, D. (2004). Generation cohorts and personal values: A comparison of China and the United States. Organization Science, 15(2), 210220.Elizur, D., Borg, I., Hunt, R., & Beck, I. M. (1991). The structure of work values: A cross cultural comparison. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12(1), 2138.Ferner, A. (1997). Country of origin effects and HRM in multinational companies. Human Resource Management Journal, 7(1), 1937.Gannon, M. J. (1971). Sources of referral and employee. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55(3), 226228.Geletkanycz, M. A. (1997). The salience of culture's consequences: The effects of cultural values on top executive commitment to the status quo. Strategic

Management Journal, 18(8), 615634.Goldberg, C. B., & Allen, D. G. (2008). Web recruiting: Can organizations level the playing eld for minority job seekers? Human Resource Management, 47, 217236.Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 13601380.Gregory, G. D., & Munch, J. M. (1997). Cultural values in international advertising: An examination of familial norms and roles in Mexico. Psychology and Marketing,

14(2), 99119.Gupta, V., & House, R. (2004). Understanding leadership in diverse cultures: Implications of project GLOBE for leading international ventures. In D. Tjosvold & K.

Leung (Eds.), Leading in high growth Asia: Managing relationship for teamwork and change (pp. 1354). Singapore: World Scientic Publishing.Haire, M., Ghiselli, E. E., & Porter, L. W. (1966). Managerial thinking: An international study. New York: Wiley.Han, S. P., & Shavitt, S. (1994). Persuasion and culture: Advertising appeals in individualistic and collectivistic societies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30

(4), 326350.Harn, T. J., & Thornton, G. C. (1985). Recruiter counselling behaviours and applicant impressions. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58, 5765.Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures and consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage Publications.Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 8194.Hofstede, G. (1994). Management scientists are human. Management Science, 40(1), 413.Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.Hofstede, G. (2003). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London, UK: McGraw-Hill.House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Cultures, leadership and organizations: A 62 nation GLOBE study. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Hult, T., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Grifth, D. A., Finnegan, C. A., Gonzalez-Padron, T., Harmancioglu, N., et al. (2008). Data equivalence in cross-cultural international

business research: assessment and guidelines. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(6), 10271044.Hysong, S. J., & Dipboye, R. L. (1999). Individual differences in applicants' reactions to employment interview elements. In R. L. Dipboye (Ed.), Symposium conducted

at the 14th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.Johnson, N. B., & Droege, S. (2004). Reections on the generalization of agency theory: Cross-cultural considerations. Human Resource Management Review, 14(3),

325335.Jurgensen, C. E. (1978). Job preferences (what makes a job good or bad?). Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(3), 267276.Kiessling, T. S., & Harvey, M. S. (2005). Strategic global human resource management research in the twenty-rst century: An endorsement of the mixed-method

research methodology. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(1), 2245.Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (1997). The impact of cultural values on employee resistance to teams: Toward a model of globalized self-managing work team

effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 22(3), 730757.Kohn, L. S., & Dipboye, R. L. (1998). The effects of interview structure on recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(9), 821843.Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals' t at work: A meta-analysis of personjob, personorganization,

persongroup, and personsupervisor t. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281342.Lacy, W. B., Bokemeier, J. L., & Shepard, J. M. (1983). Job attribute preferences and work commitment of men and women in the United States. Personnel Psychology,

36(2), 315329.Latham, G. P., & Finnegan, B. J. (1993). Perceived practicality of unstructured, patterned, and situational interviews. In H. Schuler, J. L. Farr, & M. Smith (Eds.),

Personnel selection and assessment: Individual and organizational perspectives (pp. 4145). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Lim, K. H., Leung, K., Sia, C. L., & Lee, M. (2004). Is ecommerce boundary-less? Effects of individualismcollectivism and uncertainty avoidance on internet shopping.

Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6), 545559.Marsden, P. V., & Gorman, E. H. (2001). Social networks, job changes and recruitment. In I. Berg & A. L. Kalleberg (Eds.), Sourcebook on labor markets: evolving

structures and processes New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.McManus, M.A., & Baratta, J.E. (1992). The relationship of recruiting source to performance and survival. Paper presented at theMeeting of the Society for Industrial

and Organizational Psychology, Montreal, Canada.Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potentialA nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business

Venturing, 16(1), 5175.Pervin, L. A. (1989). Persons, situations, interactions: The history of a controversy and discussion of theoretical models. Academy of Management Review, 14,

350360.Phillips, J. M. (1998). Effects of realistic job previews on multiple organizational outcomes: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), 673690.Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (2002). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in Singapore and the United States. International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 13(8), 11861205.Ployhart, R. E. (2006). Stafng in the 21st century: New challenges and strategic opportunities. Journal of Management, 32(6), 868897.

Posthuma, R. A., Joplin, J., & Maertz, C. P., Jr. (2005). Comparing the validity of turnover predictors in the United States and Mexico. International Journal of CrossCultural Management, 5(2), 165180.

Powell, G. N. (1984). Effects of job attributes and recruiting practices on applicant decisions: A comparison. Personnel Psychology, 37(4), 721732.Premack, S. L., & Wanous, J. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of realistic job preview experiments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 706719.Quaglieri, P. L. (1982). A note on variations in recruiting information obtained through different sources. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55, 5355.Rafaeli, A., Hadomi, O., & Simons, T. (2005). Recruiting through advertising or employee referrals: Costs, yields, and the effects of geographic focus. European Journal

of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14(4), 355366.Ralston, S. M., & Brady, R. (1994). The relative inuence of interview communication satisfaction on applicants' recruitment interview decisions. Journal of Business

Communication, 31(1), 6177.Ramamoorthy, N., & Carroll, S. J. (1998). Individualism/collectivism orientations and reactions toward alternative human resource management practices. Human

346 R. Ma, D.G. Allen / Human Resource Management Review 19 (2009) 334346Relations, 51(5), 571588.Robert, C., & Wasti, S. A. (2002). Organizational individualism and collectivism: Theoretical development and an empirical test of a measure. Journal of

Management, 28(4), 544566.Ronen, S., & Shenkar, O. (1985). Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A review and synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 435454.Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2000). Applicants' perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A critical review and agenda for the future. Journal of

Management, 26, 565606.Rynes, S. L. (1989). The employment interview as a recruitment device. In R. Eder & G. Ferris (Eds.), The employment interview: Theory, research, and practice (pp.127142).

Newbury Park: Sage.Rynes, S. L. (1991). In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Recruitment, job choice, and post-hire consequences: A call for new research directionsHandbook of

industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 2 (pp. 399444). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Rynes, S. L., & Barber, A. E. (1990). Applicant attraction strategies: An organizational perspective. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 286310.Rynes, S. L., Bretz, R. D., Jr., & Gerhart, B. (1991). The importance of recruitment in job choice: A different way of looking. Personnel Psychology, 44(3), 487521.Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1997). A longitudinal investigation of the relationships between job information sources, applicant perceptions of t, and work

outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), 395426.Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437453.Schneider, S. C., & DeMeyer, A. (1991). Interpreting and responding to strategic issues: The impact of national culture. Strategic Management Journal, 12(4), 307321.Schuler, R., & Rogovsky, N. (1998). Understanding compensation practice variations across rms: The impact of national culture. Journal of International Business

Studies, 29(1), 159177.Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in

experimental social psychology (pp. 165). New York: Academic Press.Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values. Journal of Social Issues, 50(4), 1945.Scullion, H. (1994). Stafng polices and strategic control in multinationals. International Studies of Management and Organization, 3(4), 86104.Shackleton, V. J., & Ali, A. H. (1990). Work-related values of managers: A test of the Hofstede model. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21(1), 109118.Sivakumar, K., & Nakata, C. (2001). The stampede toward Hofstede's framework: Avoiding the sample design pit in cross-cultural research. Journal of International

Business Studies, 32(3), 555574.Skolnik, Y. (1987). Recruitment source effects: A socialization approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. New York, NY: New York University.Smith, P. B., & Bond, M. H. (1998). Social psychology across cultures, (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Smith, P. B., Dugan, S., & Trompenaars, F. (1996). National culture and the values of organizational employees: a dimensional analysis across 43 nations. Journal of

Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27(2), 231264.Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 123.Stevens, C. K. (1997). Effects of preinterview beliefs on applicants' reactions to campus interviews. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4), 947966.Taylor, M. S., & Bergmann, T. J. (1987). Organizational recruitment activities and applicants' reactions at different stages of the recruitment process. Personnel

Psychology, 40(2), 261285.Taylor, M. S., & Schmidt, D. W. (1983). A process-oriented investigation of recruitment source effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 36(2), 343354.Taylor, M. S., & Sniezek, J. A. (1984). The college recruitment interview: Topical content and applicant reactions. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 57(2), 157168.Terence, J., & Bak, M. (1998). Foreign companies and Chinese workers: Employee motivation in the People's Republic of China. Journal of Organizational Change

Management, 11(4), 282300.Thurow, L. (1975). Generating inequality. New York: Basic Books.Tiessen, J. H. (1997). Individualism, collectivism, and entrepreneurship: A framework for international comparative research. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(5),

367384.Tietjen, M. A., & Myers, R. M. (1998). Motivation and job satisfaction. Management Decision, 36(4), 226231.Triandis, H. C. (1982). Review of culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Human Organization, 41(1), 8690.Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96(3), 506520.Triandis, H. C. (2001). Individualismcollectivism and personality. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 907924.Triandis, H. (2003). Forty-ve years of researching the culture and behavior link. In D. Tjosvold & K. Leung (Eds.), Cross-cultural management: Foundations and future

Burlington, VT: Ashgate Press.Trossman, S. (2002). The global reach of the nursing shortage. American Journal of Nursing, 102(3), 8587.Turban, D. B., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Firm reputation and applicant pool characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 733751.Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1992). Inuences of campus recruiting on applicant attraction to rm. Academy of Management Journal, 35(4), 739765.Turban, D. B., Eyring, A. R., & Campion, J. E. (1993). Job attributes: Preferences compared with reasons given for accepting and rejecting job offers. Journal of

Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66(1), 7181.Ullman, J. C. (1966). Employee referrals: Prime tool for recruiting workers. Personnel, 43, 3035.Vecchio, R. P. (1995). The impact of referral sources on employee attitudes: Evidence from a national sample. Journal of Management, 21(5), 953965.Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.Wagner, J. A. (1995). Studies of individualismcollectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 152172.Webster, C. (1992). The Effects of Hispanic subcultural identication on information search behavior. Journal of Advertising Research, 32(5), 5462.Zhang, Y., & Gelb, B. D. (1996). Matching advertising appeals to culture: The inuence of products' use conditions. Journal of Advertising, 25(3), 2946.Zottoli, M. A., & Wanous, J. P. (2000). Recruitment source research: Current status and future directions. Human Resource Management Review, 10(4), 353382.

Recruiting across cultures: A value-based model of recruitmentIntroductionA value-based model of recruitmentGenerating applicantsRecruitment source formality and individualism/collectivismRecruitment sources and power distanceRecruitment materials and individualism/collectivism

Maintaining applicant statusInterview structure and power distanceCommunication delay and uncertainty avoidance

Influencing job choiceJob attributes and masculinity/femininityRecruitment/recruiter influence and masculinity/femininityJob attributes and long-term/short-term orientation

Discussion and conclusionTheoretical contributionsManagerial implicationsConclusion

References