DCU Leadership and Talent Institute Research Seminar Series 2022

Abstract

This paper leverages imprinting theory to assess the extent to which a firm’s espoused commitment to employees at the time of their initial public offering (IPO) affects subsequent decisions related to the management of human capital. Specifically, this paper investigates whether firms with a stronger commitment to employees at the time of the IPO are more or less likely to engage in downsizing initiatives in subsequent years. We further assess key moderators of this relationship including the amount of funds raised at IPO, founder involvement, and the presence of a controlling shareholder. We assess these potential antecedents of downsizing post-IPO using a sample of 301 firms that went public in the U.S. between 2007 and 2014. We combine data from company filings with news releases and performance data from COMPUSTAT to test our conceptual model. Preliminary results indicate that values “imprinted” at the time of IPO affect subsequent downsizing decisions.

Across domains, organizations and institutions invest heavily in the judgment of performance. After all, we consider fair systems, processes, and access to equitable opportunities to be celebrated aspects of modern society. Yet beliefs about the origins of individual performance outcomes can shape important decisions in all spheres of accomplishment and any context that involves social evaluations. Challenging our broad, explicit admiration of hard work, my research shows that people are subject to a hidden “naturalness bias,” a phenomenon which I define as the premium people place on apparent natural ability and talent, as opposed to the same achievements obtained through striving and deliberate motivation. The initial findings were extended through additional sets of studies elaborating on the generalizability and persistence of these effects, such as in entrepreneurship, leadership, negotiations, networking, and employee development. Works in progress discuss the implications for gender, race, ethics and healthcare, and learning outcomes.

Abstract

Employee “water cooler conversations” with coworkers, as well as interpersonal interactions outside of one’s employing organization, are key sources of information about the labor market.  Although the value of network ties for job search is well recognized, research to date has tended to focus on how network ties relate to job search outcomes, providing little insight into what types of network ties offer information that shape job seeker perceptions and behaviors throughout the job search process.  Drawing from Steel’s (2002) evolutionary search model and social network research, we assert that different types of network ties—those that are weak versus strong and those internal versus external to the organization—offer different types of labor market information, which impacts employees’ labor market perceptions, propensity to search for employment, and job search effectiveness.

Using a time-separated research design in a sample of healthcare workers, we find that weak external ties (WETs) are associated with more optimistic perceptions of the labor market, and increased marketability and early-stage job search, and strong external ties (SETs) are associated with greater marketability and propensity to engage in early-stage job search.  Strong internal ties (SITs) have dual, opposing influences on employee job search: SITs are associated with less early-stage job search, but they are also associated with increased concrete prospects when employees are more actively seeking alternative employment.  Taken together, this study provides more nuanced insights into how network ties influence employee job search process, clarifying ambiguities in this literature.