Managers’ Evaluations of Immigrant Job Applicants

Abstract

This study examined the impact of immigrant job applicants’ private domain acculturation preferences on managers’ evaluations of person-organization (P-O) fit and hiring decisions. We employed an experimental design and presented Norwegian managers (N = 74) with video-clips of three job applicants. One of the applicants’ (target) ethnicity (Norwegian vs. Turkish) and private domain acculturation preferences (separated, assimilated, and integrated) were manipulated across four experimental conditions. Among the three applicants, the target applicant was presented as the best qualified. The results showed that the separated target was perceived as less similar to existing organizational members and the organization (i.e., lower supplementary P-O fit) than the three other targets, and as less valuable in terms of being different (i.e., lower complementary P-O fit) than the assimilated and the integrated targets. The separated target was rated significantly lower on hirability than the native and integrated targets. Despite the different hiring ratings, all targets received equal ratings on person-job (P-J) fit. The findings imply that managers placed a stronger emphasis on P-O fit than formal work competence when evaluating the separated target. Because private domain acculturation preferences can be deemed irrelevant for immigrant applicants’ job performance, our results suggest a biased employment decision against the immigrant applicant expressing private domain cultural maintenance preferences.

Keywords

hiring outcome acculturation strategy person-organization fit immigrant job applicants

Across all OECD countries, immigrants are more likely than native-born individuals to hold jobs for which they are over-qualified (OECD, 2007). Immigrants to Western Europe are also more likely to be unemployed than members of the majority populations (Van Tubergen, 2006). Job interviews are considered to be one of the primary obstacles for skilled immigrants’ access to the labor market (Coates & Carr, 2005). Several recent studies have shown evidence of unfavorable employment decisions based on subtle forms of discrimination (Regmi, Naidoo, & Regmi, 2009) and negative stereotypic attitudes held against immigrant job applicants (Agerström & Rooth, 2008; Cotton, O’Neill, & Griffin, 2007). de Meier, Born, Zielst, and van der Molen (2007) argue that interviewers’ unfamiliarity with foreign-born applicants’ culture and traditions, as well as lack of experience with interviewing foreign-born applicants, increase the risk of stereotypic activation and biased employment decisions. They found that even highly experienced recruiters were less secure of their own judgments, used more sources of information, and relied on a larger number of irrelevant cues when evaluating ethnic minority applicants compared to ethnic majority applicants.

The “fit” perspective suggests that recruiters’ perceptions of compatibility (e.g., values, personality, goals) between applicants and jobs and organizations predict their hiring recommendations (e.g., Cable & Judge, 1997, Kristof-Brown, 2000). Perceived P-O fit is regarded as the degree to which interviewers perceive that the applicant fits the organization’s values and goals, as well as the personalities of the organization’s members (Cable & Judge, 1997; Kristof-Brown, 2000). Thus, P-O fit applies to the general organizational culture, and not necessarily to the actual job (Sekiguchi, 2004).

Organizational cultures are nested within national cultures, implying that native-born job applicants have a higher chance of internalizing the values and norms dominant on both cultural levels (Brodbeck, Hanges, Dickson, Gupta, & Dorfman, 2004; Erez & Gati, 2004). Recent studies have concluded that foreign-born candidates adopting an identity consistent with the majority culture have significantly higher employment probabilities than foreign-born candidates who identify with their ethnic background or culture (Battu & Zenou, 2010; Constant & Zimmerman, 2007; Nekby & Rödin, 2010). Several researchers relate such findings to majority members’ small support for cultural maintenance among ethnic minority members and strong support for immigrants to adjust to the majority culture (Arends-Tôth & van de Vijver, 2003; Horenczyk, 1996; Van Oudenhoven, Prins, & Buunk, 1998). Against this backdrop there is reason to believe that managers focus on adjustment to the majority culture when evaluating the extent to which immigrant job applicants fit their organizations.

To date, few studies have addressed the impact of organizational fit on employment probability for foreign-born job applicants (Battu & Zenou, 2010). Consequently, the focus of the present study is on immigrant acculturation strategies as well as managers’ evaluations of applicant fit. We propose that foreign-born applicants expressing minority culture maintenance preferences will trigger hiring managers’ skepticism concerning the applicants’ fit with their organization.

Immigrants’ Cultural Identity and Acculturation Strategies

Traditionally, studies on immigrants’ position in the labor market have had a tendency to use ethnic group membership as a catch-all measure for cultural differences (Battu & Zenou, 2010). Recent studies have incorporated a more nuanced perspective and focus on the cultural identity adopted by immigrants as a result of acculturation processes. Acculturation is described as individual changes in behaviors, attitudes, values, and customs due to long-term intercultural contact (Berry, 1997; Nekby & Rödin, 2010). Berry et al. (Berry, 1997; Berry, Phinney, Sam, & Vedder, 2006) have suggested that acculturation incorporates two underlying fundamental attitudes: the extent to which immigrants favor maintaining key aspects of their ethnic culture (cultural maintenance) and the extent to which immigrants wish to have contact with and participate in the majority culture (cultural adaptation). This yields four types of acculturation strategies: Integration refers to maintaining key features of one’s original culture and at the same time adopting key features of the majority society. Assimilation refers to letting go of one’s original culture and adapting to the majority culture. Separation refers to a preference for one’s original culture and a rejection of the culture of the majority, while marginalization refers to a rejection of both one’s culture of origin and the culture of the majority.

Immigrants tend to use different acculturation strategies depending on the context (Battu & Zenou, 2010). In a study among Bangladeshi immigrants in England, Sen (2000) found that combined identification with both the minority and the majority group was not considered problematic for the immigrants themselves, suggesting that identities can be multiple. Arends-Tôth and van de Vijver (2003) found that immigrants viewed integration as the preferred mode of acculturation in their public domain (e.g., work context), but that separation was preferred in the private domain (e.g., spare time). From the perspective of majority members, however, Schalk-Soekar, Breugelmans, and van de Vijver (2008) found that majority members believed it was impossible for immigrants to combine minority culture maintenance and adjustment to the majority society, implying that maintaining one culture automatically means letting go of the other.

According to Schalk-Soekar and van de Vijver (2008), members of the mainstream culture make no distinction between their public and private domains. Consequently, majority members are likely to expect a similar homogeneous domain-independent preference for immigrants. A recent experimental study by Horverak, Sandal, Pallesen, and Timmerman (2011) supports this suggestion. That study compared managers’ evaluations of an immigrant job applicant expressing mixed acculturation strategies: integration at work (indicated by favorable recommendations from previous employers) and separation in more private domains (indicated by a home-country clothing style and preferring friends from the culture of origin), with a native applicant and an immigrant applicant expressing integration in both work and private contexts. The immigrant expressing mixed acculturation strategies had a lower employment probability compared to the two other applicants. These findings nuance the results of Battu and Zenou (2010), Constant and Zimmerman (2007), and Nekby and Rödin (2010), who concluded that given a high attachment to the majority culture, identification to the ethnic minority group was unimportant for employment outcomes. Notably, in the three latter studies, the conclusions were primarily based on follow-up surveys using immigrant background data matched with register data on education and employment. It was not investigated how majority culture managers responded to applicants’ expressions of acculturation strategy during the employment evaluation process. To further examine the role of acculturation in immigrants’ labor marked outcomes, the present study considers how managers’ evaluations of applicant fit and employment recommendations are influenced by immigrants’ cultural maintenance preferences in the private domain.

Person-Organization Fit

Research on P-O fit has traditionally focused on supplementary fit, defined as the extent to which applicants are perceived as similar to existing organizational members and as sharing the organization’s values (Cable & Edwards, 2004; Piasentin & Chapman, 2006, 2007). This means that the applicant possesses characteristics similar to those already widely possessed in the existing workforce (Cable & Edwards, 2004). In the extant research, values have been the most common basis for supplementary fit assessments (Kristof, 1996; Piasentin & Chapman, 2006). The similarity-attraction paradigm introduced by Byrne (1971) suggests that interviewers are more attracted to similar individuals and therefore assess similar applicants as more qualified for the job and a better match for the organization than dissimilar applicants. For example, Ferris and Judge (1991) suggested that interviewers may see themselves as good standards for evaluating P-O fit because they are successful organizational employees. Consequently, applicant dissimilarity to the interviewer may lower evaluations of fit with the organization.

Another form of P-O fit is complementary fit (Muchinsky & Monahan, 1987), which occurs when applicants possess unique characteristics that are perceived as different from other employees’ characteristics, yet valuable to the organization (Piasentin & Chapman, 2007). Empirical investigations of P-O fit have given this type of fit minimal attention (Piasentin and Chapman, 2007), and to our knowledge, no study has investigated managers’ evaluations of immigrant job applicants’ complementary P-O fit. Piasentin and Chapman (2006) suggest that while values may be critical for assessing supplementary P-O fit, personality characteristics or work-related skills and abilities may be important for assessing complementary P-O fit. Cable and Edwards (2004) found that complementary fit accounted for unique variance in work outcomes and thus provided a more complete assessment of P-O fit. Moreover, Piasentin and Chapman (2007) found that employees’ perceived complementarity with their organization contributed to overall judgments of fit incrementally to perceptions of similarity (i.e., supplementary P-O fit).

In the work environment, ethnic diversity gives rise to different life experiences, knowledge, and insights, which in turn may provide more and better alternatives to problem solving (McLeod & Lobel, 1992), enhance creativity (Ling, 1990), thus enhancing accomplishment of organizational goals (Ely & Thomas, 2001). Ethnic diversity among employees may also serve as a competitive advantage in rapidly changing and increasingly international markets. Still, Piasentin and Chapman (2007) have pointed out that only a small proportion of individuals recognize the value of “fitting in by being different.”

The Present Study

Whereas the topics of acculturation psychology and applicant fit have received extensive attention, there is a lack of studies investigating how immigrants’ acculturation strategies affect managers’ evaluations of applicant fit and hirability. In our study, we draw a clear distinction between immigrants’ acculturation preferences in their public and private domains. Specifically, we investigate whether information regarding acculturation preferences in the private sphere only impact managers’ fit evaluations and hiring decisions. A negative impact of private domain acculturation preferences would indicate an employment decision bias.

An experimental design was used in which Norwegian managers were presented with video clips of three job applicants. Whereas the presentation of two applicants was similar for all managers, we manipulated the ethnicity (Norwegian vs. Turkish immigrant) and the private domain acculturation strategy (separated, assimilated, and integrated for the Turkish immigrant) of the third applicant. The third applicant will be referred to as the native, the separated, the assimilated, and the integrated target. Among the three applicants, the target applicant was presented as the most socially competent, and as the best professionally qualified candidate. Based on research presented above, we expect that managers respond negatively to a strong desire for private sphere cultural maintenance (separated target). Specifically, we hypothesize that the separated target’s expression of cultural maintenance preferences results in lower ratings of supplementary P-O fit because this candidate is likely to be perceived as the most dissimilar to existing employees in the workplace.

Regarding complementary P-O fit, we expect the highest complementary P-O fit ratings for the integrated and the separated targets. The logic behind this reasoning is that these targets’ maintenance of their background culture provides access to the benefits of a diverse working environment. We expect the lowest complementary P-O fit ratings for the native and the assimilated targets since these targets are likely to be seen as most similar to the existing organizational members (most of whom are likely to be ethnic Norwegian) and thus less likely to complement the organization in terms of being different.

Findings from the above-mentioned acculturation and social psychology research (Arends-Tôth & van de Vijver, 2003; Byrne, 1971) suggest that the desire for similarity may be stronger than the recognition of applicants’ ability to complement the organization with new perspectives in recruitment processes. Consequently, we expected lower hirability ratings, and a lower employment probability for the separated target than for the three other target candidates. The following specific hypotheses were investigated:

The separated target candidate is rated as exhibiting less supplementary P-O fit than the three other target candidates.

The integrated and the separated target candidates are rated higher on complementary P-O fit than the assimilated and native target candidates.

The separated target candidate is rated as less hirable and is less often ranked as the preferred candidate for the job than the three other target candidates.

Method

Procedure

Four different strategies were employed to invite participants to take part in the study: (1) Managers from 10 companies were invited via a contact person in their organization, (2) invitations were distributed via two organizations that run leader networks, (3) managers attending leadership training courses and lectures for managers were invited, and (4) managers were recruited by an ad in an online magazine for managers. For the managers in the first two groups, a reminder to participate in the study was distributed 1 week after the original invitation. It was not possible to estimate the response rate via the mailing list. The response rate from the participating organizations ranged from 13.6% to 60.0%, with an overall response rate of 21.0%. No monetary or material reward was given. In the electronic setup, it was not possible for respondents to skip questions. Hence, we had no missing data.

Participants

The sample (N = 74) consisted of 49 men and 25 women whose age ranged from 29 to 67 years (M = 46.8, SD = 9.30). All but two of the respondents were Norwegian born. Because the two non-Norwegians were of Western origin and had lived in Norway for a long period of time, they were retained in the sample. The majority of the participants held a leadership position at the time of the data collection (95.9%). With respect to leadership level, 33.3% were chief executive officers/senior executives, 16.7% were the head of a division, 31.9% were leaders at the department/unit level, and 17.7% held other types of leadership positions. The average number of years in a leader position was 13.24 (SD = 8.99). Among the respondents, 78.7% worked in the private sector and 21.3% worked in the public sector. Only three respondents had no previous experience with job interviews. On average, the participants had interviewed 32.92 applicants (SD = 28.90). The distribution of the participants’ age and sex by the experimental conditions were the following: Norwegian target: age (M = 44.80, SD = 8.87), sex (male, n = 12, female, n = 8); assimilated target: age (M = 45.21, SD = 9.32), sex (male, n = 11, female, n = 3); separated target: age (M = 47.41, SD = 8.53), sex (male, n = 13, female, n = 4); and integrated target: age (M = 49.00, SD = 9.27), sex (male, n = 13, female, n = 10).

The immigrant applicant was of Turkish origin. Turks represent one of the largest immigrant groups in Norway (Statistics Norway, 2011) and in several other European countries (Vasileva, 2009). Turks are often seen as the prototypical immigrant group, with relatively low social status across many West-European countries (Arends-Tôth & van de Vijver, 2003; Hagendoorn & Hraba, 1989). Moreover, Kaya and Kentel (2005) claim that Turkish immigrants are especially prone to experiencing stereotypic bias.

Experimental Design and Procedure

The experiment was set up online. The managers were asked to answer several background questions and were next randomized into one of the four experimental conditions. All respondents were asked to imagine that the human resource department in their organization was hiring a new advisor. A job description for the position was then presented, listing the formal requirements for the position and the key tasks to be performed. Next, the managers were asked to watch video clips of structured interviews with three male job candidates (actors). The second candidate was the target candidate. The experimental conditions were the following: a Norwegian target candidate (n = 20), an immigrant target candidate with an integrated acculturation strategy (n = 23), an immigrant target candidate with an assimilated acculturation strategy (n = 14), and an immigrant target candidate with a separated acculturation strategy (n = 17).

When the target was presented as an immigrant, he was described as exhibiting strong ties to the majority culture in the public domain, and with varying degrees of ethnic cultural maintenance preferences in the private domain. The manipulations concerned the extent to which he expressed interest in socializing with ethnic majority members and the extent to which he pursued traditions and norms from his culture of origin in his spare time. Specifically, the assimilated target expressed adaptation to the majority culture’s way of living. The integrated target expressed interest in participating in the majority society and culture and at the same time emphasized the importance of engaging in Turkish social networks and traditions. The separated target solely expressed a need for Turkish cultural maintenance. The core elements used to illustrate the acculturation strategies were adopted from vignettes presented in Van Oudenhoven et al. (1998). In the video clips, the immigrant target presented himself as having lived in Norway for 20 years. He spoke fluent Norwegian, but with an accent. The video clips of the two non-target candidates were kept constant across all conditions.

The managers were asked to evaluate each candidate on P-O fit measures and hirability before viewing the next candidate. After having watched and evaluated all three candidates, they were asked to indicate which of the candidates they would prefer to hire. After they ranked the candidates, the respondents were asked to indicate the degree to which the films were perceived as realistic. No time restrictions were given. All manuscripts were of equal length (varied within 15 words), and the film clips lasted for approximately 3 minutes. The first author acted as the interviewer by asking the questions and was not visible in the videos.

The job description outlined primary work tasks such as personnel and organizational development, recruitment, and providing guidance in situations related to labor legislation and difficult personnel cases. The requirements for the position were college or university education (preferably with a specialization in HR), previous experience within the field, knowledge of labor legislation, good cooperation and communication skills, and ability to work in a structured and independent manner. All the candidates fulfilled the requirements to some degree. The target candidate had the highest level of education, had the most relevant educational background, and was more experienced within the HR field than the non-targets.

Instruments

All English language items were translated into Norwegian. Three persons made individual translations before they discussed and revised the translations until consensus was achieved. For items originally used on employee samples (i.e., complementary P-O fit), we developed new items suited for managers’ perspectives and adjusted these to a Norwegian work context.

Person-organization fit.

We adapted two items from Kristof-Brown (2000) and one item from Higgins and Judge (2004) and combined them into a measure of supplementary P-O fit: “To what extent does this applicant fit into your organization?” “To what extent is this applicant similar to other employees?” and “To what extent do this applicant’s values reflect the values of the organization?” Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .82.

Based on the items presented by Piasentin and Chapman (2007), we developed two items to measure complementary P-O fit: “To what extent can this applicant contribute perspectives that are important because they differ from those of other employees?” and “To what extent can this applicant stand out in a positive way in the organization?” The correlation between the responses to the two items was .65. Responses to all the fit items were given on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (to a very large extent).

Hirability

A 9-point scale from 1 (strongly recommend not to hire) to 9 (strongly recommend to hire) was used to evaluate the likelihood of recommending the candidate. The item is adopted from Higgins and Judge (2004) and Chen, Lee, and Yeh (2008).

Hiring outcome

Hiring outcome refers to which of the three candidates the managers preferred to rank as the most suitable candidate for the position. To aid the process of ranking, pictures and names of the candidates were presented with their respective numbers.

Control Measures

Person-job fit (P-J fit)

A measure of P-J fit was included to investigate if respondents recognized the targets’ professional job qualifications. Two items adapted from Kristof-Brown (2000) and Higgins and Judge (2004) were combined to measure P-J fit: “To what extent does this applicant fit the demands of the job?” and “To what extent does this applicant possess the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) necessary to perform the duties of this specific job?” Responses were provided on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (to a very large extent). The correlation between the responses to the two P-J fit items was .74.

Realism

To test whether managers experienced the videos as realistic, we employed the same procedure as Lievens and Peeters (2008). The respondents rated the overall realism on a scale from 1 (very unrealistic) to 7 (very realistic).

Attractiveness

Meta-analyses have shown that physical attractiveness is correlated with positive outcomes on job-related criteria (Hosoda, Stone-Romero, & Coats, 2003) and has a positive effect on interviewer ratings (Barrick, Shaffer, & DeGrassi, 2009). Therefore, attractiveness was included as a control measure to test whether the respondents perceived the two target actors (a Norwegian and a Turkish actor) as different in this aspect. We included the item “This applicant has an attractive appearance,” and responses were given on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Results

Control Measures

Randomization check

The four experimental groups did not differ significantly in terms of sex, χ²(3, n = 74) = 3.07, p = .38, or age, F(3, 70) = .90, p = .45, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .04. Nor did the results reveal significant differences between the experimental groups in levels of education, F(3, 70) = .17, p = .92, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .01, in years of experience as a leader, F(3, 70) = .17, p = .91, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .01, or in number of job interviews previously conducted, F(3, 70) = .41, p = .75, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .02.

Person-Job fit

A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant differences between the experimental conditions on the P-J fit measure, F(3, 70) = 2.28, p = .09, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .09.

Realism

The average rating of realism was 4.59 (SD = 1.37), indicating that managers perceived the videos as fairly realistic. Ratings of realism did not differ significantly across the experimental conditions, F(3, 70) = 1.15, p = .34, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .05.

Attractiveness

A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant difference in attractiveness ratings between the Norwegian and the Turkish target actors, F(1, 72) = 1.67, p = .20, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .02.

Preliminary assumption testing was conducted to check for normality, linearity, outliers, and homogeneity of variance. These assumptions were only violated for Hypothesis 3, where the Levene test showed that there was not homogeneity of variance across the experimental conditions (in which case the analysis was supplemented with the Welch test and the Brown-Forsythe test in order to investigate the robustness of the comparisons of means). Correlations among the P-O fit variables, hirability, and hiring recommendation are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Intercorrelations Between Supplementary P-O Fit, Complementary P-O Fit, Hirability, and Hiring Recommendation Across Experimental Conditions

Measure	1	2	3	4
1. Supplementary P-O fit	—
2. Complementary P-O fit	.38	—
3. Hirability	.72	.59	—
4. Target candidate hiring recommendation	.42	.46	.51	—

Note: Hiring recommendation scored as 0 = not hired, 1 = hired. All correlations are significant at p < .001.

The main purpose of our study was to investigate if the separated target candidate received more unfavorable employment evaluations compared to the three other target candidates based on his private domain acculturation preferences. To test Hypothesis 1, stating that the separated target candidate is rated lower than the three other candidates on supplementary P-O fit, a one-way between-groups analysis of variance was performed. The results showed a statistically significant difference between the four conditions, F(3, 70) = 10.44, p < .001, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .31. In support of our hypothesis, post hoc comparisons employing LSD tests indicated that the mean supplementary P-O fit score for the separated target (M = 2.59, SD = .62) was significantly lower than the ratings of the native target (M = 3.55, SD = .56), assimilated target (M = 3.50, SD = .73), and integrated target (M = 3.49, SD = .53) (all ps < .001).

Hypothesis 2 stated that the integrated and the separated targets are rated higher than the native and the assimilated targets on complementary P-O fit. To investigate this hypothesis, we performed a one-way between-groups analysis of variance. The results showed a statistically significant difference between the four target candidates, F(3, 70) = 3.02, p = .04, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .11. Post hoc comparisons using LSD tests indicated that the mean complementary P-O fit scores for the integrated target (M = 4.13, SD = .69) and the assimilated target (M = 4.00, SD = .68) were significantly higher (p < .05) than the ratings of the native target (M = 3.45, SD = .92). No significant differences were obtained between the separated target (M = 3.79, SD = .75) and the three other targets. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was not supported.

Our third hypothesis proposed that the separated target candidate was rated as less hirable than the three other target candidates. A one-way between-groups analysis of variance was performed. The results showed a statistically significant difference between the four conditions, F(3, 70) = 4.93, p < .01, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .18. The Welch and Brown Forsythe test yielded significant results as well, attesting to the robustness of the findings in spite of the lack of homogeneity of variances across the experimental conditions. In support of our hypothesis, the post hoc comparisons using LSD tests indicated that the mean score for the separated target (M = 5.47, SD = 2.03) was significantly lower (p < .05) than the native target (M = 6.70, SD = 1.42) and the integrated target (M = 7.30, SD = 1.15). Contrary to our hypothesis, however, no significant difference in hirability was obtained between the separated and the assimilated (M = 6.29, SD = 1.49) target candidates (see Table 2 and Figure 1).

Table 2.

Means, Standard Deviations, and One-Way Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) for Effects of Candidate Private Domain Acculturation Strategy on Managers’ Evaluations of P-O Fit and Hirability

	Native Target		Assimilated Target		Separated Target		Integrated Target		ANOVA
Variable	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F(3, 70)	$η_{p}^{2}$
Supplementary P-O fit	3.55	.56	3.50	.73	2.59	.62	3.49	.53	10.44**	.31
Complementary P-O fit	3.45	.92	4.00	.68	3.79	.75	4.13	.69	3.02*	.11
Hirability	6.70	1.41	6.29	1.49	5.47	2.03	7.30	1.15	4.93**	.17

Note: $η_{p}^{2}$ = partial eta squared.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Figure 1.

Mean Ratings of Targets’ Supplementary P-O Fit, Complementary P-O Fit, and Hirability

The previous analyses have shown that the managers’ P-O fit evaluations and hiring ratings differ when they are presented with targets holding different acculturation strategies. To investigate if the managers’ hirability ratings are influenced by their P-O fit evaluations, we performed a follow-up one-way between-groups analysis of covariance. The independent variable was acculturation strategy, and the dependent variable was hirability. Supplementary and complementary P-O fit were used as covariates. The results showed that both supplementary P-O fit, F(1, 68) = 32.76, p < . 001, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .33, and complementary P-O fit, F(1, 68) = 21.00, p < .001, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .24, were significant covariates. This indicates that differences among the targets in hirability ratings can be seen as working through fit evaluations: Applicants who do not fit in are considered less hirable. However, the results also revealed a significant effect of acculturation strategy after controlling for supplementary and complementary P-O fit measures, F(3, 68) = 2.83, p = .04, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .11. This finding suggests that the effect of targets’ acculturation strategy on hirability ratings cannot be fully explained by differences in P-O fit.

Our third hypothesis also proposed that the separated target candidate would be less often ranked as the preferred candidate for the job compared to the other target candidates. Fisher’s Exact Test (one-tailed) comparing the hiring probability of the separated target to the three other targets just missed the determined significance level (defined as .05); χ² = (1, n = 74) = 3.41, p < .10. The percentages for preferring the target candidate was 58.8% for the separated target, 70% for the native target, 85.7% for the assimilated target, and 87% for the integrated target candidate, respectively.

Discussion

An experimental design was employed to investigate the impact of immigrant job candidates’ private domain acculturation preferences on hiring managers’ P-O fit evaluations and hiring decisions. Supporting our first hypothesis, the immigrant candidate expressing separation preferences in his private domain was evaluated as having the lowest supplementary P-O fit compared to the three other target candidates. This finding suggests that the managers perceived this target as being less similar to existing employees in the workplace and as to a lesser degree sharing the organization’s values.

Our second hypothesis stated that the separated and the integrated targets were rated higher than the assimilated and the native targets on complementary P-O fit. Contrary to our expectations, a different pattern emerged: Both the integrated and the assimilated targets received higher ratings on complementary P-O fit than the native target, indicating an appreciation of the value of being different for these two targets relative to the native target. The separated target was not rated as exhibiting more complementary P-O fit than neither the assimilated nor the native targets. This indicates that candidates who express cultural maintenance preferences in the private domain (i.e., separation) are not valued for being different in a sense that could benefit the organization. Our main finding regarding complementary P-O fit is that only immigrant candidates who express adaptation to the host culture, both at work and in their private domain (i.e., assimilated and integrated), seem to be valued for being different relative to native candidates. These findings are in line with Schalk-Soekar et al.’s (2008) description of mainstreamers’ disbelief in immigrants’ ability to combine acculturation preferences according to the context in which they engage.

The third hypothesis stated that the separated target was rated lowest on hirability and had a lower hiring probability than the three other target candidates. In support of this hypothesis, we found that the separated target received lower hirability ratings than the native and the integrated target. Contrary to our hypothesis, no differences in hirability ratings were found between the separated and the assimilated targets, although an inspection of the mean scores revealed a tendency of higher hirability ratings for the assimilated over the separated target. Similarly, we found that the separated target was least often ranked as the best candidate compared to the three other target candidates. Although this difference was not significant, the tendency of a lowered employment probability is consistent with the findings in Horverak et al.’s (2011) study.

Notably, the results of our study contradicts Battu and Zenou (2010), Constant and Zimmerman (2007), and Nekby and Rödin’s (2010) conclusions that showing attachment to ones’ ethnic culture is not detrimental for employment outcomes as long as immigrants also show an interest in having a strong attachment to majority culture. Battu and Zenou (2010) proposed that only immigrants expressing extreme identities (in both public and private domains) experienced employment penalties. In the current experiment, the separated target was presented as being well integrated in the majority public domain based on his former education and work experience within the majority work context. Our findings suggest that immigrants expressing strong ethnic identities lived out in their private domain only also experience employment penalties. As such, the desire for similarity outweighs the desire for complementing the organization with new perspectives. This tendency may result in a homogeneous workforce and thus works against organizational policies toward promoting a diverse working environment (Harcourt, Lam, Harcourt, & Flynn, 2008; Richard, 2000).

Segrest Purkiss, Perrewé, Gillespie, Mayes, and Ferris (2006) found that the combination of an ethnic minority name and an accent triggered more negative interviewer reactions than an ethnic minority name or an accent alone. Similarly, our results showed that the pairing of ethnicity and a specific private domain acculturation strategy (separation) triggered a more skeptical view towards the candidate. We found that 41.2% of managers presented with the separated target preferred a less qualified (native nontarget) candidate. The respective numbers for managers presented with the assimilated and integrated targets were 14.3 % and 13.0%. This finding implies that acculturation strategy may be more important for immigrants’ employment probabilities than ethnicity per se.

Strengths and Limitations

The respondents in our study were managers, responsible for personnel and employment decisions in their respective organizations; thus, we had a representative sample in the sense that the respondents were actual decision makers. By presenting the managers with videos of the job applicants, we provided them with a parallel audio-visual impression of the candidate. The job announcement and all manuscripts were based on actual job requirements and job descriptions. In addition, we introduced the applicants as a future colleague and close collaborator with the manager. This approach was chosen to increase the realism of the experimental interview setting, and the managers in our study rated the videos as fairly realistic.

However, it is possible that the managers recognized the underlying aim of investigating employment evaluations of foreign-born job applicants, which in turn might have resulted in social desirable responses. Barron, Hebl, and King (2011) suggest that hiring managers are sensitive to cues regarding appropriate behavior and are inclined to reduce their observably discriminatory behavior. Thus, discrimination against separated immigrant applicants may be even stronger in real life settings than what we observed. Similarly, studies of employment decisions in field settings may also reveal unfavorable employment outcomes for assimilated and integrated immigrant applicants even though this was not observed in our experimental study.

The response rate and the sample size in our study was rather low; hence, the generalizability of our results can be questioned. Nonetheless, the obtained response rate is within the norm for surveys of organizational representatives such as managers (Baruch & Holtom, 2008). Most managers experience time pressure and this is probably one reason for the relative low response rate. As for the current study, the response rate obtained from the leadership network list may still be an underestimate as lack of response may be due to sick leave, holiday, or obsolete addresses. Another concern related to generalizability of our findings applies to the cultural contrasts, which in the present study included Turkish and Norwegian applicants only. Thus, future studies should include other cultural contrasts in order to corroborate our findings and conclusions.

Implications

In accordance with several previous studies (de Meier et al., 2007; Horverak et al., 2011; Segrest Purkiss et al., 2006), our results indicate that interviewers allow irrelevant factors to affect judgments and employment decisions about ethnic minority job applicants. Our study points at the relevance of investigating the role of acculturation on immigrants’ labor market outcomes as a domain-specific concept. For example, acculturation as expressed in the work situation may have relevance for work performance because a worker who maintains specific communication patterns from his culture of origin may interact less efficiently with customers or colleagues. For HR practitioners, it is important to emphasize the use of stringent evaluation criteria based on job analysis to give less room for subjectivity, especially when assessing immigrant job applicants’ organizational suitability (Agerström & Rooth, 2008). Interviewer training programs should raise awareness of sources of employment decision bias, such as the effect of acculturation demonstrated in the present study. This may strengthen interviewers’ ability to differentiate between relevant and irrelevant candidate information, increase the accuracy of P-O fit assessments, and thus facilitate the implementation of fair recruitment strategies and practices.

Very few studies have so far considered how judgments of P-O fit affect hiring of immigrants; thus, the present study provides a valuable contribution to the research literature. One avenue for future research would be to investigate the accuracy of P-O fit assessment during job interviews. For example, will hiring managers tend to underestimate immigrant applicants’ “objective” supplementary P-O fit and overestimate native candidates’ complementary P-O fit?

In conclusion, the results of the current study illustrates that the combined use of supplementary and complementary P-O fit measures provides important nuances to the understanding of managers’ interview evaluations of immigrant candidates. The results of this study extend previous research findings by illustrating that private domain acculturation preferences impact on P-O fit evaluations and employment outcomes for foreign-born candidates.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the following people for their help with developing the experimental materials, data collection, and technical assistance: Marianne Bille, Geir Scott Brunborg, Murit Cetin, Gunnar Ellingsen, Murat Gencher, Kurt Georg Gjerde, Dag Hammerborg, Sigurd William Hystad, Hilde Høivik, Ole Rogstad Melkevik, Arne Magnus Morken, Trude Remme, and Fons J. R.van de Vijver. We would also like to thank the contact persons and the leaders in the participation organizations.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The present research was funded by the Norwegian Research Council (Arbeidslivsforskning), the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV), and a grant from the Meltzer fund.

References

Agerström

Rooth

D.-O.

(2008). Implicit prejudice and ethnic minorities: Arab-Muslims in Sweden (Discussion Paper Series. IZA DP No. 3873). Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor.

Arends-Tôth

J. V.

van de Vijver

F. J. R.

(2003). Multiculturalism and acculturation: Views of Dutch and Turkish-Dutch. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 249-266.

Barrick

M. R.

Shaffer

J. A.

DeGrassi

S. W.

(2009). What you see may not be what you get: Relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 6, 1394-1411.

Barron

L. G.

Hebl

King

E. D.

(2011). Effects of manifest ethnic identification on employment discrimination. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 23-30.

Baruch

Holtom

B. C.

(2008). Survey response levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61, 1139-1411.

Battu

Zenou

(2010). Oppositional identities and employment for ethnic minorities: Evidence from England. The Economic Journal, 120, 52-71.

Berry

J. W.

(1997). Immigration, acculturation and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5-68.

Berry

J. W.

Phinney

Sam

D. L.

Vedder

P. E.

(Eds.). (2006). Immigrant youth in cultural transition: Acculturation, identity and adaptation across national contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Brodbeck

F. C.

Hanges

P. J.

Dickson

M. W.

Gupta

Dorfman

P. W.

(2004). Societal culture and industrial sector influences on organizational culture. In House

R. J.

Hanges

P. J.

Javidan

Dorfman

P. W.

Gupta

(Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations. The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 654-668). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

10.

Byrne

(1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

11.

Cable

D. M.

Edwards

J. R.

(2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 822-834.

12.

Cable

D. M.

Judge

T.A.

(1997). Interviewers’ perceptions of person-organization fit and organizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 546-561.

13.

Chen

C.- H. V.

Lee

H.- M.

Yeh

Y.- J. Y.

(2008). The antecedents and consequences of person-organization fit: Ingratiation, similarity, hiring recommendations and job offer. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16, 210-219.

14.

Coats

Carr

S. C.

(2005). Skilled immigrants and selection bias: A theory-based field study from New Zealand. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 577-599.

15.

Constant

Zimmerman

K. F.

(2007). Measuring ethnic identity and its impact on economic behavior (IZA Discussion Paper, No. 3063). Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor.

16.

Cotton

J. L.

O’Neill

B. S.

Griffin

(2007). The “name game”: Affective and hiring reactions to first names. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 18-39.

17.

de Meier

L. A. L.

Born

M. P.

van Zielst

J. V.

van der Molen

H. T.

(2007). Analyzing judgments of ethnically diverse applicants during personnel selection: A study at the Dutch police. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 139-152.

18.

Ely

R. J.

Thomas

D. A.

(2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 229-273.

19.

Erez

Gati

(2004). A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: From the micro level of the individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 583-598.

20.

Ferris

G. R.

Judge

T. A.

(1991). Personnel/Human resources management: A political influence perspective. Journal of Management, 17, 447-488.

21.

Hagendoorn

Hraba

(1989). Foreign, different, deviant, seclusive, and working class: Anchors to an ethnic hierarchy in The Netherlands. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 12, 441-468.

22.

Harcourt

Lam

Harcourt

Flynn

(2008). Discrimination in hiring against immigrants and ethnic minorities: The effect of unionization. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, 98-115.

23.

Higgins

C. A.

Judge

T. A.

(2004). The effect of applicant influence tactics on recruiter perceptions of fit and hiring recommendations: A field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 622-632.

24.

Horenczyk

(Ed.). (1996). Migrant identities in conflict: Acculturation attitudes and perceived acculturation ideologies. In Breakwell Lyons

(Eds.), Changing European identities: Social psychological analyses of social change (pp. 241-250). Melbourne, Australia: Butterworth-Heinemann.

25.

Horverak

J. G.

Sandal

G. M.

Pallesen

Timmerman

(2011). Hiring rankings of immigrant job applicants: The influence of acculturation strategies and personality trait perception. Manuscript submitted for publication.

26.

Hosoda

Stone-Romero

E. F.

Coates

(2003). The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Personnel Psychology, 56, 431-462.

27.

Kaya

Kentel

(2005). Euro-Turks: A bridge, or a breach, between Turkey and the European Union. Brussels, Belgium: CEPS Publication. Retrieved May 1, 2011, from http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2005-10-04-kaya-en.html

28.

Kristof

A. L.

(1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurements, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1-28.

29.

Kristof-Brown

A. L.

(2000). Perceived applicant fit: Distinguishing between recruiters’ perceptions of person-job and person-organization fit. Personnel Psychology, 53, 643-671.

30.

Lievens

Peeters

(2008). Interviewers’ sensitivity to impression management tactics in structured interviews. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24, 174-180.

31.

Ling

S. C.

(1990). The effects of group cultural composition and cultural attitudes on performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Western Ontario, Canada.

32.

McLeod

P. L.

Lobel

S. A.

(1992). The effect of ethnic diversity on idea generation in small groups. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Best Papers Proceedings, 2, 227-231.

33.

Muchinsky

P. M.

Monahan

C. J.

(1987). What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 268-277.

34.

Nekby

Rödin

(2010). Acculturation identity and employment among second and middle generation immigrants. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 35-50.

35.

Piasentin

K. A.

Chapman

D. S.

(2006). Subjective person-organization fit: Bridging the gap between conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 202-221.

36.

Piasentin

K. A.

Chapman

D. S.

(2007). Perceived similarity and complementarity as predictors of subjective person-organization fit. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 341-354.

37.

Regmi

Naidoo

Regmi

(2009). Understanding the effect of discrimination in the workplace: A case study amongst Nepalese immigrants in the UK. Equal Opportunities International, 28, 398-414.

38.

Richard

O. C.

(2000). Racial diversity, business strategy, and firm performance: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 164-177.

39.

Schalk-Soekar

S. R. G.

Breugelmans

S. M.

van

Vijver

F. J. R.

(2008). Support for multiculturalism in The Netherlands. International Social Science Journal, 59, 269-281.

40.

Schalk-Soekar

S. R. G.

van de Vijver

F. J. R.

(2008). The concept of multiculturalism: A study among Dutch majority members. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 2152-2178.

41.

Segrest Purkiss

S. L.

Perrewé

P. L.

Gillespie

T. L.

Mayes

B. T.

Ferris

G. R.

(2006). Implicit sources of bias in employment interview judgments and decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 151-167.

42.

Sekiguchi

(2004). Person-organization fit and person-job fit in employee selection: A review of the literature. Osaka Keidai Ronshu, 54, 179-196.

43.

Sen

(2000). Other people, British Academy Lecture (November 7). Retrieved May 9, 2011, from http://people.cis.ksu.edu/~ab/Miscellany/otherpeople.html

44.

OECD. (2007). International Migration Outlook, SOPEMI 2007: Matching educational background and employment: A challenge for immigrants in host countries. Retrieved May 11, 2011, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/19/5/41561786.pdf

45.

Statistics Norway. (2011). Immigration and immigrants. Retrieved May 2, 2011, from http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/02/01/10/innvbef_en/

46.

Van Oudenhoven

J. P.

Prins

K. S.

Buunk

P. B.

(1998). Attitudes of minority and majority members towards adaptation of immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 995-1013.

47.

Van Tubergen

(2006). Immigrant integration. A cross-national study. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC.

48.

Vasileva

(2009). Citizens of European countries account for the majority of the foreign population in EU-27 in 2008 (Document no. KS-SF-09-094). Retrieved May 2, 2011, from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-09-094/EN/KS-SF-09-094-EN.PDF