Many researchers argue that successful socialization of a new employee can determine how less likely an employee is to leave his job voluntarily and how high likely to experience higher job satisfaction and exhibit greater productivity (e.g. Bauer & Green, 1994; Schein, 1985; Feldman & Arnold, 1983; Van Maanen, 1979). The speed and ease with which individuals learn the ropes in organizations they have recently joined are crucial from both the individuals’ and organization’s point of view (Greenberg & Baron, 1993). For new employees, organizational socialization is important since a new member learns the value system, the norms and the required behavior patterns of the organization he is entering. For employers, organizational socialization is important since they can affect the behavior of the people they hire (Champoux, 2011).

Traditional form of socialization of newcomers is designed to facilitate the entry of new recruits to an organization (Trowler & Knight, 1999). It involves formal induction programs, mentoring arrangements, the provision of handbooks and social events. However, organizational socialization is a more complex concept. Trowler and Knight (1999) propose that the traditional form of socialization in higher education is based on Van Maanen and Schein’s analysis (1979) of the dimensions of six key variables that define the corporate structural-functional perspective, in which the values, background and individuality the newcomer brings to the organization are neglected. Such aspects of induction are definitely important; however, they are not adequate (Weimer & Lenze 1991). Organizations socialize their new members by creating a series of events which serve the function of undoing old values. This process is often unpleasant and requires either strong motivation to endure it or strong organizational forces to make the person endure it (Kolb, Rubin & Mclntyre, 1974). While reconsidering organizational socialization, unique backgrounds of individuals which help them make sense of the new organization need to be considered (Tierney, 1997).

Boice (1992) found that new faculty members describe their initiation period as a time of "avoidance, distress, and unproductive beginning", which could be avoided when organizations make a genuine effort to become aware of and understand their own organizational socialization practices and appreciate the delicate problems which exist both for the newcomer and for his manager in the early years of the career (Trowler & Knight, 1999).

This study aims at analyzing the relationship between socialization of newcomers at task, department and organization levels and various organizational (knowledge sharing, in service training, mentorship) and individual level (self-efficacy, organizational commitment, job satisfaction) factors. The results are expected to have some practical and theoretical repercussions on organizational socialization of faculty members in higher education setting. The results are expected to help defining major and minor policies for selection, recruitment and retention of faculty members in higher education organizations. Besides, the results will help organizations to revise their induction programs with a more sophisticated approach than corporate structural-functional perspective, including postmodernism and other perspectives which emphasize social agency as newcomers need to be seen as active agents in the process of socialization.

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Bauer, T. N., Morrison, E. W., & Callister, R. R. (1998). Organizational socialization: A review and directions for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 16, 149–214. Boice, R. (1992). The New Faculty Member. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Capa, Y., Cakiroglu, J., Sarıkaya, H. (2005). The Development and Validation of a Turkish Version of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale. Education and Science, 30, 74-81. Feldman, D. C. (1981). The multiple socialization of organization members. Academy of Management Review, 6, 309–318. Haueter, J.A., Macan, T.H., & Winter, J. (2003). Measurement of newcomer socialization. Construct validation of a multidimensional scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63 (1), 20-39. Kondakci, Y., & Haser, C. (2011). Professional socialization and academic identity development of young faculty members. Unpublished research report. TUBİTAK: Ankara. (in Turkish). Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application. Sage Publications. O’Reilly, C. A. & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: the effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499. Tierney, W. (1997). Organizational socialization in higher education. Journal of Higher Education 68(1), 1–16. Trowler, P. and Knight, P. (1999). Higher Education 37: 177–195, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands. Van Maanen, J. and Schein, E.H. (1979). ‘Toward a theory of organizational socialization’. Research in Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 1. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press Wasti, S. A. (1999). Organizational Commitment and Collectivism: The Case of Turkey. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign. Wasti, S. A. (2003). Organizational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of cultural values. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 303-321.