Newcomers' organizational socialization: A systemic literature review

Yu, Lu; Ren, Hong; Singh, Romila Article Newcomers' organizational socialization: A systemic literature review International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJMESS) Provided in Cooperation with: International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJMESS) Suggested Citation: Yu, Lu; Ren, Hong; Singh, Romila (2025) : Newcomers' organizational socialization: A systemic literature review, International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJMESS), ISSN 2304-1366, IJMESS International Publishers, Jersey City, NJ, Vol. 14, Iss. 1/2, pp. 23-53, https://doi.org/10.32327/IJMESS/14.1-2.2025.2 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/314800 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ 23 International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 2025, Vol. 14(1-2), pp. 23 – 53. ISSN 2304 – 1366 https://www.ijmess.com Newcomers’ Organizational Socialization: A Systemic Literature Review *Lu Yu1 Hong Ren2 Romila Singh2 1 College of Business, Missouri State University, Springfield, Missouri, USA 2 Lubar College of Business, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA This paper systematically reviews research on organizational socialization by examining ten key theories within four major perspectives: Uncertainty Reduction, Identity Affiliation, Social Exchange, and Resource. We aim to address three main research questions: (1) What motivates individuals to engage in proactive socialization? (2) What mechanisms facilitate effective socialization? and (3) What resources are essential for successful newcomer integration? A multi-database search was conducted across Web of Science and PsycINFO, covering peer-reviewed empirical articles published since 2000. A total of 112 sources were included in the systematic review. The findings demonstrate how these theories have evolved to incorporate the growing influence of technology, diversity, and remote work, with significant adaptations to address organizational changes. The paper concludes by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of these developments, offering insights on how organizations can refine their socialization strategies to better support newcomers in today’s dynamic work environments. Keywords: Organizational socialization, uncertainty reduction, identity affiliation, social exchange, resource perspective JEL: M10, M12, M14 Organizational socialization is a critical process that enables newcomers to appropriately integrate into the organization's culture, norms, and work environment, which is essential for both individual and internal success. It is linked to several key outcomes such as employee retention, performance, and goal achievement (Van Maanen et al ., 1979). Traditionally, this process has been examined through established theories like Uncertainty Reduction (Berger and Calabrese, 1974), Social Identity (Tajfel and Turner, 1985), and Social Exchange (Emerson, 1976), which have guided our understanding of how newcomers acquire knowledge, form connections, and adapt (Chao et al ., 1994). However, shifts in the modern workplace—including the prevalence of remote work, greater diversity, rapid technological adoption, and increasingly flexible organizational structures—introduce challenges to the applicability of these established theories (Ritz et al ., 2023). Although past research offers valuable insights into individual facets of socialization, much of it remains confined to single theoretical frameworks rather than offering an integrated approach that captures the complex realities of contemporary organizational settings (Haave et al ., 2023). Consequently, reevaluating and synthesizing existing frameworks is essenDOI:10.32327/IJMESS . 1 4 . 1 - 2 .202 5 . 2 Manuscript received September 11, 2024; revised January 9, 2024 ; accepted January 27, 2025. © The Author(s); CC BY-NC; Licensee IJMESS Publisher: UCHPRO & National D.B.A Society, USA *Corresponding author: [email protected] International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 24 tial to ensure their relevance and utility in today’s contexts. To address these gaps, this systematic review examines current organizational socialization literature through ten key theoretical perspectives. It explores three primary research questions informed by identified limitations in previous studies. First, it considers what motivates newcomers to engage proactively in contemporary, often remote or diverse work settings, where traditional drivers of socialization may no longer apply. Second, it investigates the mechanisms that support socialization in increasingly virtual and fluid organizational structures, where established hierarchies and interaction patterns differ from conventional norms. Third, it identifies the critical resources necessary for effective socialization and how organizations can best provide them, particularly when informal learning and direct guidance are limited. By answering these questions, this review integrates multiple theoretical frameworks with today’s organizational challenges, offering both academic and managerial insights. These contributions guide future research and inform practical strategies that ensure organizational socialization theories remain relevant and effective in evolving workplace environments. METHODOLOGY This study employed a systematic literature review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) systematic mapping technique to analyze the existing literature on organizational socialization, following the guidelines of Kitchenham et al. (2009). The approach provides an overview of the research landscape by evaluating the quality and quantity of evidence. A well-defined search strategy was used to identify relevant articles from two major databases—Web of Science and PsycINFO—chosen for their comprehensive coverage of peer-reviewed journals in management, psychology, and organizational behavior. Search strings combined keywords like “organizational socialization,” “onboarding,” and “newcomer adjustment,” which were refined for relevance (see Table 1). The search focused on publications from 2000 to 2024 to include both historical and contemporary studies. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for screening articles are outlined in Table 2. Empirical studies published in English, with direct implications for organizational socialization, and supported by a clear theoretical framework were included. Studies such as literature reviews, conceptual papers, and those without empirical data or theoretical grounding were excluded. The initial database search yielded 3,331 articles (1,837 from Web of Science and 1,494 from Preliminary Strings Selected Strings Organizational socialization, onboarding, newcomer adjustment Organizational socialization, onboarding, newcomer adjustment, organizational entry, employee socialization Source: Authors’ presentation Table 1. Search Strings Yu et al. 25 Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria 1. Empirical research involving primary data collection Non-empirical research such as literature reviews, conceptual papers, book chapters, meta-analyses, magazine articles, research reports, media comments, or short papers 2. Published in English Articles not published in English, extended abstracts, conference proceedings, or articles under review 3. Explicit focus on organizational socialization Studies that are unrelated to organizational socialization or focusing on specific socialization behaviors or tactics without direct implications for overall organizational socialization experience 4. Clear articulation of an overarching theoretical framework Lack of theoretical grounding or conceptual clarity Source: Authors’ presentation Table 2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria PsycINFO). After removing 1,118 duplicates, 2,213 articles were screened, and 1,638 were excluded based on relevance. A total of 575 articles advanced to full-text screening, and after further exclusions, 153 articles were included in the final review. Data extraction focused on key findings and theoretical frameworks, with articles categorized into four main perspectives: Uncertainty Reduction, Identity Affiliation, Social Exchange, and Resource Perspectives. This categorization was done through manual coding with reliability checks, with the results provided in the Appendix-II (please read supplementary file). The articles included in this review were selected based on their alignment with the theoretical framework and the strength of their empirical support. Given the nature of this study as a systematic literature review, traditional statistical effect measures (such as risk ratios or mean differences) were not applicable. Instead, the synthesis of findings was based on qualitative categorization, grouping studies by their theoretical frameworks. This approach enabled a comprehensive synthesis of key themes, trends, and theoretical perspectives relevant to organizational socialization. A holistic mapping approach was used to organize the literature, identifying key themes, trends, and research gaps in organizational socialization. The PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1) illustrates the selection process. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines (PRISMA checklist, Appendix-I), the review employed wellestablished databases to ensure a rigorous and transparent process, with the mapping technique facilitating the identification of both foundational and emerging areas in the field, highlighting avenues for future research. RESULTS This section synthesizes significant contributions of ten key theories in organizational socialization, categorized into four perspectives—Uncertainty Reduction, Identity Affiliation, Social Exchange, and Resource Perspective. These perspectives collectively demonstrate motivations, mechanisms, and resources involved in organizational socialization in contemporary workplaces. International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 26 Source: Authors’ presentation Figure 1. PRISMA Flow Diagram Uncertainty Reduction The Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT) underscores newcomers’ need to mitigate task-related and social ambiguities to achieve stability and comfort (Berger and Calabrese, 1974). Katz (1980) illustrates how uncertainty fuels information-seeking in early socialization stages, while effective tactics such as strategic HR practices bolster newcomer adjustment, role clarity, and trust (Peng et al ., 2023). Mentorship and leadership are instrumental in reducing role ambiguity (Brunsdon and Curtner-Smith, 2023), supporting professional confidence (Schuth et al ., 2023), and shaping migrant newcomers’ experiences in supportive corporate cultures (Grosskopf et al ., 2022). In remote or virtual contexts, supervisor support and informal connections alleviate anxiety and improve integration (Cai et al ., 2023; Coppe et al ., 2023), while personal uncertainty avoidance strategies influence organizational fit and turnover intentions (Cai et al ., 2020). Artificial Intelligence (AI) based onboarding platforms further diminish ambiguity (Ritz et al ., 2023), reinforcing the importance of structured onboarding, consistent mentorship, and feedback loops for successful adjustment (Cooper-Thomas and Burke, 2012). Uncertainty reduction correlates with higher task mastery, role clarity, job performance, and commitment (Ashforth et al ., 2007; Saks et al ., 2007), aided by standardized roles that enhance both mastery and Clarity (Hsiung and Hsieh, 2003). Additionally, acquiring information mediates relationships between Yu et al. 27 socialization tactics and newcomer attitudes, expediting learning processes (Cooper-Thomas and Anderson, 2006). Identity Affiliation The identity affiliation perspective, essential to organizational socialization, underscores proactive socialization motivation among new employees. Grounded in the Need-to-Belong and Social Identity Theory (SIT), it stresses the inherent human desire to be part of social groups, influencing newcomers’ proactive behaviors. These theories collectively highlight how identity affiliation drives newcomers to actively engage in socialization, aiming to become integral to their new work environment. - Need-to-Belong Theory Originally grounded in Maslow’s (1943) framework and expanded by Baumeister and Leary (1995), the Need-to-Belong Theory posits that humans inherently seek acceptance within social groups. In organizational contexts, this need drives identity formation, commitment, job satisfaction, and proactive behaviors (Wanberg, 2012). Digital environments similarly fulfill—and sometimes complicate—this motivation, as newcomers use social media, smartphones, and online networks to connect but risk ostracism when excluded (Haldorai et al ., 2020; James et al ., 2017; Kim et al ., 2016; Yarberry and Sims, 2021). - Social Identity Theory (SIT) Social Identity Theory (SIT) (Tajfel and Turner, 1985) further clarifies how identifying with favorable groups boosts self-esteem (Hogg and Terry, 2001), reduces uncertainty (Hayashi, 2013), and fosters role clarity and performance (Kammeyer-Mueller, Schilpzand, et al ., 2012; Smith et al ., 2017). Organizational values, leadership styles, and locus of control shape how newcomers form these identities (Çiçek, 2023; Lee, 2013), while balancing individuality and conformity emerges as critical in specialized settings (Benson et al ., 2016). Recent studies emphasize the significance of inclusive leadership for diverse newcomers (Dai and Fang, 2023), cross-cultural identity negotiations (Omanović and Langley, 2023), and strong team identification to support disabled employees (Sanclemente et al ., 2024). Mentorship and peer relationships ease discrimination-based challenges (Karam et al ., 2023) and foster professional socialization in sports (Vasquez and Wallhead, 2023), with diversity and inclusion initiatives enhancing social integration (Sial et al ., 2023). Not all identity expressions accelerate socialization, as newcomers’ online conversational strategies may not yield immediate acceptance (Burke et al ., 2010), yet highlighting authentic self-expression rather than solely organizational identity can improve retention and performance (Cable et al ., 2013). Experienced newcomers who adapt personal identities often integrate more smoothly (Beyer and Hannah, 2002), and multiple role models further enrich personal International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 28 and professional identity formation (Filstad, 2004), underscoring the broad influence of identity affiliation on organizational socialization. Social Exchange Theory (SET) Social Exchange Theory (SET), rooted in Emerson (1976), examines how both tangible and intangible exchanges shape organizational relationships. Its reciprocal nature (Homans, 1958) highlights that positive exchanges—such as supportive leadership and mentoring—foster beneficial outcomes, whereas negative ones (e.g., incivility) can hinder future interactions. This principle is central to understanding how contextual factors affect newcomers’ integration and performance (Jokisaari, 2013; Nifadkar, 2020), as also noted in Uncertainty Reduction and Identity Affiliation perspectives. Research shows that organizational and supervisory support elevates job satisfaction, commitment, and knowledge acquisition (Baranik et al ., 2010; Caesens et al ., 2016; Perrot et al ., 2014), while incivility contributes to learning difficulties and turnover (Ghosh et al ., 2013). Leadership and socialization tactics likewise improve relationship building, learning, and adjustment (Korte, 2010). SET’s broader applications reveal that social identification and trust affect turnover intentions, innovation, and knowledge sharing (Avanzi et al ., 2014; Park et al ., 2015; Schaubroeck et al ., 2013). More recent work explores how leadership influences newcomers’ psychological states (Frögéli et al ., 2023) and how social exchange mediates transition shock for newly graduated nurses (Li et al ., 2023). Socialization supports organizational citizenship behaviors (Adil et al ., 2023), fosters role clarity and emotional attachment (Sial et al ., 2023), promotes well-being in virtual settings (Woo et al ., 2023), and drives effective communication and knowledge sharing via social media (Ghosh et al ., 2023). Vocational training coupled with trainer support can stabilize identification and engagement (Maué et al ., 2023). Research further indicates that socialization tactics bolster newcomer embeddedness, reduce turnover, and shape team-based outcomes through reciprocal relationships (Allen, 2006; Allen and Shanock, 2013; Chang et al ., 2009; Chen and Klimoski, 2003; Chen et al ., 2011; Chong et al ., 2021). Proactive newcomer behaviors also thrive on reciprocal support from coaches, peers, and organizations, strengthening assimilation, commitment, and satisfaction (Cranmer, 2018; Cranmer et al ., 2017). - Psychological Contract Perspective The psychological contract, an evolving implicit agreement between newcomers and organizations (Rousseau, 1989), extends beyond early socialization stages (Delobbe et al ., 2016) and influences proactive behaviors, role clarity, and stress management (Woodrow and Guest, 2017). Fulfilling this contract improves tenure and adjustment (Buckley et al ., 2002). Recent studies illuminate its complexity: organizational socialization tactics shape contract formation, influencing job satisfaction and commit- Yu et al. 29 ment (Kim and Moon, 2021; Manuti et al ., 2016). Contract fulfillment partially mediates relationships between socialization tactics and attachment-related outcomes, while breach can shift organizational identification and elevate turnover intentions (DeBode et al ., 2017; Tatachari, 2014). Affective commitment also mediates the link between breach, turnover intentions, and emotional exhaustion (Lapointe et al ., 2013). Knowledge sharing, balanced employment relationships, and social benefits further shape newcomers’ contract perceptions over time (Aranibar et al ., 2022; Jiang et al ., 2022; Payne et al ., 2015). Technology use, patronage, and supportive socialization predict contract fulfillment, mitigate job stress, and enhance organizational commitment (Audrin and Audrin, 2023; Lee and Wei, 2021). Resource Perspective The resource-based perspective in organizational socialization emphasizes the roles of personal, social, and organizational resources in aiding newcomers’ adjustment. It includes the personal capital approach, stressing individual resources in proactive socialization, and considers the impacts of organizational insiders (social network theory) and the organization itself (social resources theory). Theories like Conservation of Resources (COR), Person-Environment fit (P-E fit), and AttractionSimilarity-Attrition (ASA) model further integrate these resources, highlighting the importance of aligning individual attributes with organizational needs, showing how resource exchange and conservation improve newcomers’ fit perception and socialization outcomes. - The Personal Capital Approach The Personal Capital Approach (Luthans and Youssef, 2004) underscores how human, social, psychological (PsyCap), and cultural capital collectively shape newcomers’ proactive socialization. Human capital—knowledge and expertise—affects the success of socialization tactics, with factors such as work experience and cognitive ability influencing proactive behaviors (Batistič, 2018; Kim et al ., 2005). Technological capabilities also play a role: Zheng et al . (2023) highlight AI-focused collaboration tools that facilitate newcomer integration. Social capital, outlined by Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998), supports learning, career development, role clarity, and organizational commitment (Bauer et al ., 2007; Fang et al ., 2011; Morrison, 2002), while PsyCap—including hope, optimism, resilience, and self-efficacy— promotes positive job attitudes, performance, and lower turnover (Kašpárková et al ., 2018; Luthans, 2002; Luthans and Youssef, 2007; Saks and Gruman, 2012; Seligman, 1998; Snyder, 2000; Song and Chathoth, 2010). Recent findings show that inclusive leadership strengthens newcomers’ psychological resources (Dai and Fang, 2023) and that perceived organizational support fosters PsyCap, influencing retention and engagement (Song et al ., 2023; Zhou et al ., 2022). Cultural capital, related to familiarity International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 30 with organizational norms, also shapes acceptance and fit (Bauer and Erdogan, 2014). In support of broader resource perspectives, evidence indicates that resource exchange in virtual groups fosters cognitive discussions and knowledge access (Ahuja and Galvin, 2003; Borgatti and Cross, 2003), while employment type, mentoring, and feedback seeking affect newcomer proactivity, retention, and satisfaction (Benzinger, 2016; Finkelstein et al ., 2003; Fu et al ., 2005). Structured or informal processes—such as empowerment, autonomy support, and coaching—further reinforce role clarity, emotional engagement, and adaptation (Chen, 2005; Chen et al ., 2011; Chong et al ., 2021; Cousins et al ., 2006; Gruman et al ., 2006; Jia et al ., 2021; Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2018; Liu et al ., 2021). Pre-entry work experience, cultural orientation, volunteering stages, or national contexts also shape socialization outcomes, as they enhance fit, commitment, and success (Carr et al ., 2006; Fan and Wanous, 2008; Hart and Miller, 2005; Haski-Leventhal and Bargal, 2008; He et al ., 2020; Hooghe, 2005; Hsiung and Hsieh, 2003; Korte, 2010; Kowtha, 2018). Multiple role models, tailored policies, and curiosity support complex socialization (Filstad, 2004; Gardner, 2008; Gómez, 2009; Harrison et al ., 2011), while perceived similarity, P-O fit, trust, and empowerment emerge as key relational mechanisms (Jokisaari and Nurmi, 2009; Kammeyer-Mueller, Simon, et al ., 2012; Kammeyer-Mueller, Schilpzand, et al ., 2012; Khorramabad, 2021; Kjeldsen and Jacobsen, 2013; Klein et al ., 2006; Livi et al ., 2018; Nifadkar, 2020; Zou et al ., 2015). Altogether, these resource-oriented constructs strengthen or complement the more general principles of uncertainty reduction, identity affiliation, and social exchange, underscoring how personal capital and supportive networks drive effective newcomer socialization. - The Social Network Approach The social network approach highlights how interpersonal ties shape job comprehension, resource exchange, and integration (Fang et al ., 2017; Tichy et al ., 1979), with network size, density, range, and status significantly affecting socialization outcomes (Hatmaker, 2015). Strong, diverse networks enhance task mastery and commitment (Morrison, 2002), while higher network status and size facilitate adjustment (Fang et al ., 2011). Structural and relational embeddedness (Granovetter, 1992) jointly influence knowledge and role clarity: weak ties can boost creativity (Zhou et al ., 2009), strong ties anchored in trust support mastery (Krackhardt et al ., 2003), and brokerage positions in sparse networks foster performance (Burt, 2004). Central advice networks correlate with better job outcomes, although network concentration may impede group performance (Sparrowe et al ., 2001). Relational ties further provide social support and facilitate critical information exchange, strengthening adjustment through attitude convergence (Casciaro and Lobo, 2008; Hansen et al ., 2005, Jokisaari and Nurmi, 2012; Well- Yu et al. 37 with the emotional and informational resources they need to adjust and thrive. P-E fit Theory further emphasizes the importance of matching individual skills with organizational needs to facilitate effective integration. Finally, the findings reveal resources critical for effective socialization, as explained by the Resource Perspective. Structured onboarding programs, access to mentoring, and the development of PsyCap all contribute to improved role clarity and newcomer engagement. Additionally, having access to a diverse social network facilitates creativity and problem-solving, further enriching the socialization experience through dynamic knowledge sharing and collaborative learning. CONCLUSION This systematic review provides a comprehensive understanding of organizational socialization by addressing three key research questions. First, the motivation for proactive socialization is largely driven by newcomers’ need to reduce uncertainty and establish a sense of belonging. Theories such as URT and Identity Affiliation reveal that newcomers actively seek information and align themselves with social groups to achieve clarity and inclusion within their new environments. Second, the review identifies various mechanisms that facilitate socialization in modern organizations. The social exchange perspective underscores the importance of reciprocal relationships, where support from supervisors and colleagues aids in newcomer adjustment. The identity affiliation perspective shows how forming social identities within a new organization fosters a sense of belonging and identity, promoting the alignment between newcomers and organizational culture. Third, resources play a critical role in effective socialization. Personal capital, social networks, and digital tools are essential in enabling newcomers to adapt to the challenges of their roles. The alignment between individual attributes and organizational resources, as highlighted by theories such as P-E fit and COR, leads to improved job satisfaction, commitment, and successful integration. IMPLICATIONS - Theoretical Implications This review advances theoretical understanding in organizational socialization by offering specific contributions across four major perspectives: Uncertainty Reduction, Identity Affiliation, Social Exchange, and Resource. Each perspective is reconsidered in light of technological advancements, remote work dynamics, and the rise of AI-assisted systems, resulting in significant theoretical expansions. The Uncertainty Reduction Perspective has traditionally emphasized interpersonal interactions, such as supervisor support and peer mentoring, as central to reducing newcomers’ ambiguity. However, the International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 38 increasing reliance on digital platforms in modern workplaces calls for a broader conceptualization (e.g., Stofberg et al ., 2021). We propose a dual-layer model of uncertainty reduction that includes both interpersonal and technological mechanisms. While interpersonal uncertainty reduction continues to rely on social interactions, technological uncertainty reduction occurs through AI-driven systems that provide real-time feedback, automated onboarding processes, and role-specific guidance. This suggests that uncertainty management is no longer confined to human interactions but includes a parallel process facilitated by digital tools. Notably, this dual-layer approach may be more salient in hybrid or fully remote organizations, where newcomers must navigate a mix of face-to-face guidance and asynchronous digital support. In traditional, predominantly on-site workplaces, the technological layer may supplement rather than transform the established interpersonal processes. Future research could explore how these two layers intersect and whether they operate independently or reinforce each other during the onboarding process. In addition to reframing uncertainty reduction, we suggest that identity affiliation extends beyond traditional, in-person relationships. In contemporary organizations, identity formation increasingly occurs in both physical and digital workspaces (e.g., Hirst and Humphreys, 2020). We introduce the concept of digital identity affiliation, where newcomers simultaneously construct organizational identities through traditional team interactions and virtual platforms. This hybrid identity formation reflects the blending of online and offline experiences, reshaping how newcomers perceive their roles and integrate into workplace cultures. Additionally, the rise of AI-powered support systems suggests that individuals might develop attachment bonds with non-human agents, such as chatbots and virtual assistants, further expanding the boundaries of identity formation (e.g., Xie and Pentina, 2022). However, the extent to which digital identity affiliation takes hold may depend on newcomers’ digital literacy, previous virtual team experience, and the organizational reliance on virtual communication. For instance, employees who are early-career professionals, international hires facing cultural or linguistic barriers, or those in project-based roles may find digital identity formation particularly valuable, as it grants them rapid, flexible access to diverse informational and social resources. In more traditional or regulated settings, digital identity affiliation may serve as a complementary rather than dominant pathway to belonging. This perspective underscores the need for identity affiliation to account for both human and technological actors in shaping social belonging and role identity in digital workplaces. This reconfiguration of uncertainty reduction and identity formation also fundamentally reshapes our understanding of social exchange and resource perspectives. The SET traditionally focuses on reciprocal exchanges between newcomers and organizational insiders, including managers and peers (Emerson, 1976). We extend this framework by proposing the concept of digital reciprocity, where reciprocal excha- Yu et al. 39 nges occur between employees and AI-driven systems. For example, newcomers might receive personalized coaching, career development tips, and performance recommendations from AI platforms in return for completing tasks and providing data inputs. This form of digital reciprocity will likely be most pronounced in organizations that rely heavily on virtual platforms and remote work arrangements, whereas on-site or less tech-dependent firms may see AI support as an auxiliary resource rather than a primary exchange partner. Moreover, the psychological contract between employees and organizations may also extend to digital systems, as employees develop expectations regarding continuous AI support and personalized development pathways. In highly innovative, flexible industries (e.g., IT, consulting), newcomers might embrace and trust these digitally mediated relationships readily. By contrast, in more traditional or heavily regulated sectors, the interplay between digital reciprocity and psychological contracts may be constrained by formal protocols and cultural expectations that limit non-human agency in socialization. These evolving dynamics challenge the traditional human-centric view of SET, prompting future research on trust formation, fairness perceptions, and role expectations in AI-mediated environments. Similarly, the Resource Perspective requires an updated framework that recognizes the dynamic interplay between human and technological resources. We propose the concept of dynamic resource bundling, where personal, social, and organizational resources are continuously reconfigured through technology-enhanced processes. Personal resources now include digital resilience, reflecting newcomers’ capacity to adapt to rapidly changing technological environments (e.g., Qi and Yang, 2024). Social resources extend beyond traditional workplace networks to include virtual communities, online forums, and professional platforms that provide emotional and informational support. Organizational resources, such as AI-driven onboarding platforms and virtual mentorship programs, act as active agents that facilitate learning, task completion, and career advancement. In knowledgeintensive or fluid, project-based industries, these dynamic resource configurations can significantly enhance knowledge sharing and adaptation, while more regulated sectors may find their scope limited by compliance requirements and standardized procedures. The particular combination of resources that newcomers leverage will also depend on their digital proficiency, cultural background, and the organization’s technological maturity. By clarifying these boundary conditions and contingencies, these theoretical contributions gain practical nuance. Recognizing that the applicability and impact of dual-layer uncertainty reduction, digital identity affiliation, digital reciprocity, and dynamic resource bundling depend on organizational structures, occupational roles, workforce composition, and cultural contexts allows both researchers and practitioners to better gauge when and how to employ these new insights. In doing so, these expanded International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 40 frameworks become not only more robust conceptually but also more strategically useful, guiding tailored interventions that resonate with specific organizational and individual circumstances. - Practical Implications This systematic review illustrates that newcomers to organizations are motivated to reduce uncertainty, establish a sense of belonging, and align their personal capabilities with the organization’s culture and demands. Ensuring clarity in roles, fostering supportive relationships, and providing environments in which newcomers’ values and skills resonate with those of the organization are all central to successful integration. Collectively, these insights have direct implications for improving newcomer experiences, enhancing performance, and reducing turnover—objectives that are critically important in contemporary, often hybrid or remote, work settings. Several practical strategies emerge from these findings. To minimize ambiguity and associated turnover risks, providing realistic job previews, structured onboarding sessions, and consistent feedback can help newcomers establish role clarity early on (Peng et al ., 2023; Ritz et al ., 2023). In hybrid or remote contexts, where informal interactions are limited, practices that encourage mentorship, inclusive leadership, and team-building activities help strengthen newcomers’ sense of community and belonging (Dai and Fang, 2023; Sial et al ., 2023; Torlak et al ., 2024). Sustainable support networks, enabled by both personal connections and digital communication platforms, ensure ongoing access to information and emotional backing, ultimately improving retention and well-being (Fang et al ., 2017; Morrison, 2002). Embracing technology-mediated solutions further streamlines integration. Digital onboarding platforms, AI-guided training modules, and virtual collaboration systems expedite learning, bridge informational gaps, and tailor support to individual newcomers, all of which are critical in geographically dispersed work settings (Cimperman, 2023; Yarbrough and Ramos Salazar, 2023; Zheng et al ., 2023). Simultaneously, aligning newcomer expectations with organizational values and career trajectories— through transparent communication, honoring psychological contracts, and leveraging inclusive recruitment and selection processes—fosters trust, stability, and long-term organizational commitment (French et al ., 1974; Rousseau, 1989). By employing these evidence-based strategies, organizations can effectively address practical challenges such as role confusion, social isolation, resource scarcity, and complex work arrangements. In doing so, they create an environment conducive to newcomer success, satisfaction, and sustained engagement, ultimately benefiting both the individuals and the broader organization. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Yu et al. 41 While this systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of organizational socialization research, several limitations suggest avenues for future inquiry. First, the review’s focus on empirical studies with primary data collection may have excluded investigations that, though not explicitly framed in terms of organizational socialization, could offer valuable insights into related behaviors and tactics. Subsequent reviews could broaden their inclusion criteria, incorporating studies centered on constructs such as informal learning or professional identity development, to capture a more diverse range of socialization strategies. Second, the relatively strict selection criteria and limited availability of studies—particularly those addressing complexities in remote, hybrid, and gig-based work—resulted in a modest final sample. This highlights a gap in literature, as evolving workplace structures challenge traditional frameworks of socialization. Future research should expand both its temporal and topical scope to explore how newcomers adapt in dynamic, digitally mediated environments. Additionally, this review emphasized studies with explicit theoretical underpinnings, potentially overlooking research grounded in emerging or implicit frameworks. Future scholarship could relax this criterion to embrace interdisciplinary perspectives, drawing on fields such as human-computer interaction, cross-cultural psychology, and social network analysis. By doing so, researchers can generate innovative theoretical models that capture the interplay of technology, culture, and human interaction in shaping newcomer experiences. To build more nuanced and multifaceted theories of organizational socialization, scholars should employ diverse and methodologically rigorous research designs. For example, field experiments in organizations implementing AI-based onboarding tools could randomly assign newcomers to receive different forms of mentoring (traditional, AI-driven, or blended) and track their adjustment, performance, and retention over time. Longitudinal designs, including multiwave surveys and longitudinal social network analyses, can illuminate how digital identity affiliation and dynamic resource bundling evolve as newcomers gain experience. Such approaches could reveal how newcomers’ support networks shift from reliance on assigned mentors to more fluid, distributed ties involving both human and AI-based actors. Qualitative methods—such as interviews, ethnographies, and diary studies—would complement these quantitative approaches, offering deeper insights into newcomers’ sensemaking processes, trust formation, and relational dynamics with AI-driven systems. These could be conducted in varying organizational and cultural contexts, thereby uncovering how norms and values shape the acceptance and efficacy of digital reciprocity and technologically mediated socialization. Cross-cultural comparisons can further clarify how cultural dimensions influence the uptake of these theoretical expansions, while mixed-methods approaches and multi-level modeling enable researchers to parse out how organization-level infrastructures, team-level leadership behaviors, and individual-level newcomer characteristics interact to shape socialization outcomes. Finally, diversity, equity , and inclusion (DEI) considerations remain vital. Research should examine how AI-based International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 42 interventions and virtual onboarding processes can be designed to promote inclusive socialization, particularly for newcomers from underrepresented groups who may experience heightened isolation or bias. Comparative studies across various demographic and cultural settings would help identify specific strategies or tools foster equitable integration and well-being. By addressing these limitations and embracing these rigorous, contextually attuned methods, scholars can substantially advance theoretical and empirical knowledge of organizational socialization. Such efforts will not only elucidate the dynamic interplay of technology, culture, and human relationships in shaping newcomer experiences but also inform practitioners on how to create more inclusive, adaptive, and effective socialization processes in an increasingly complex organizational landscape. REFERENCES Adil, A., Kausar, S., Ameer, S., Ghayas, S., & Shujja, S. (2023). Impact of organizational socialization on organizational citizenship behavior: Mediating role of knowledge sharing and role clarity. Current Psychology , 42(7): 5685-5693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01899-x Ahuja, M. K. & Galvin, J. E. (2003). Socialization in virtual groups. Journal of Management, 29(2): 161185. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630302900203 Allen, D. G. (2006). Do organizational socialization tactics influence newcomer embeddedness and turnover? Journal of Management , 32(2): 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305280103 Allen, D. G. & Shanock, L. R. (2013). Perceived organizational support and embeddedness as key mechanisms connecting socialization tactics to commitment and turnover among new employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 34(3): 350369. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1805 Anzollito, P. & Cooper, D. (2022). Loyalties divided or identities as resources? The role of external relational identification in facilitating socialization. Management Decision , 60(6): 1702-1718. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2021-0007 Aranibar, M.F., Baez-Lopez, Y., Limon-Romero, J., Ramírez-Barón, M.C., García Rivera, B.R., Ortega-Pérez Tejada, M., & Hernández Bejarano, J. (2022). The impact of social benefits on work commitment and organizational socialization in the manufacturing industry. Sustainability , 14(17): 10807. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710807 Ashforth, B. E., Sluss, D. M., & Saks, A. M. (2007). Socialization tactics, proactive behavior, and newcomer learning: Integrating socialization models. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70(3): 447-462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.02.001 Audrin, B. & Audrin, C. (2023). Scan it, buy it, pay it–customers’ psychological contracts as partial employees in retail. Personnel Review , 52(5): 1387-1404. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2020-0640 Avanzi, L., Fraccaroli, F., Sarchielli, G., Ullrich, J., & Van Dick, R. (2014). Staying or leaving: A combined social identity and social exchange approach to predicting employee turnover intentions. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management , 63(3): 272-289. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/IJPPM-02-2013-0028 Baranik, L.E., Roling, E.A., & Eby, L.T. (2010). Why does mentoring work? The role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 76(3): 366-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.07.004 Batistič, S. (2018). Looking beyond-socialization tactics: The role of human resource systems in the socialization process. Human Resource Management Review , 28(2): 220-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.06.004 Batistič, S. & Kaše, R. (2022). Emergence and persistence of work relationships in early socialization: Contrasting interpersonal and organizational perspectives. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 31(6): 894-907. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2022.2050220 Bauer, T.N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D.M., & Tucker, J.S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology , 92(3): 707-721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.707 Bauer, T.N. & Erdogan, B. (2014). Delineating and reviewing the role of newcomer capital in organizational socialization. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior , 1(1): 439-457. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych031413-091251 Bauer, T.N., Erdogan, B., Caughlin, D., Ellis, A.M., & Kurkoski, J. (2021). Jump-starting the socialization experience: The longitudinal role of day 1 newcomer resources on adjustment. Journal of Management , 47(8): 2226-2261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320962835 Bauer, T.N., Perrot, S., Liden, R.C., & Erdogan, B. (2019). Understanding the consequences of newcomer proactive behaviors: The moderating contextual role of servant leadership. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 112: 356-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.05.001 Yu et al. 43 Baumeister, R.F. & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin , 117(3): 497-529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497 Benson, A.J., Evans, M.B., & Eys, M.A. (2016). Organizational socialization in team sport environments. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 26(4): 463-473. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12460 Benzinger, D. (2016). Organizational socialization tactics and newcomer information seeking in the contingent workforce. Personnel Review, 45(4): 743-763. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-06-2014-0131 Beyer, J. M. & Hannah, D. R. (2002). Building on the past: enacting established personal identities in a new work setting. Organization Science, 13(6): 636-652. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.6.636.495 Berger, C.R. & Calabrese, R.J. (1974). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research , 1(2): 99-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14682958.1975.tb00258.x Bolino, M., Valcea, S., & Harvey, J. (2010). Employee, manage thyself: The potentially negative implications of expecting employees to behave proactively. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 83(2): 325-345. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317910X493134 Borgatti, S.P. & Cross R. (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science 49(4):432-445. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.49.4.432.14428 Boswell, W.R., Boudreau, J.W., & Tichy, J. (2005). The relationship between employee job change and job satisfaction: The honeymoon-hangover effect. Journal of Applied Psychology , 90(5): 882-892. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.882 Brunsdon, J.J. & Curtner-Smith, M.D. (2023). ‘We’re trying to produce serious educators’: Impact of secondary organizational socialization on mid-career faculty members’ delivery of PETE. Sport, Education and Society , 28(4): 369-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2022.2030700 Buckley, M.R., Mobbs, T.A., Mendoza, J.L., Novicevic, M.M., Carraher, S.M., & Beu, D.S. (2002). Implementing realistic job previews and expectation-lowering procedures: A field experiment. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 61(2): 263-278. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1856 Burke, M., Kraut, R., & Joyce, E. (2010). Membership claims and requests: Conversation-level newcomer socialization strategies in online groups. Small Group Research, 41(1): 4-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496409351936 Burt, R.S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology , 110(2): 349-399. https://doi.org/10.1086/421787 Cable, D. M., Gino, F., and Staats, B. R. (2013). Breaking them in or eliciting their best? Reframing socialization around newcomers' authentic self-expression. Administrative Science Quarterly , 58(1): 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213477098 Cai, D., Li, Z., Xu, L., Fan, L., Wen, S., Li, F., & Guan, Y. (2023). Sustaining newcomers’ career adaptability: The roles of socialization tactics, job embeddedness and career variety. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 96(2): 264-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12423 Cai, D., Liu, S., Liu, J., Yao, L., & Jia, X. (2021). Mentoring and newcomer well-being: A socialization resources perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 36(3): 285-298. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-08-2019-0485 Cai, Z., Wu, D., Xin, Y., Chen, Y., & Wu, H. (2020). Formal mentoring support, person–environment fit and newcomer’s intention to leave: Does newcomer’s uncertainty avoidance orientation matter? Personnel Review , 49(8): 1749-1767. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2018-0171 Caesens, G., Marique, G., Hanin, D., & Stinglhamber, F. (2016). The relationship between perceived organizational support and proactive behaviour directed towards the organization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 25(3): 398411. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2015.1092960 Carr, J. C., Pearson, A. W., Vest, M. J., & Boyar, S. L. (2006). Prior occupational experience, anticipatory socialization, and employee retention. Journal of Management, 32(3): 343-359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305280749 Casciaro, T. & Lobo, M.S. (2008). When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Administrative Science Quarterly , 53(4): 655-684. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.53.4.655 Chao, G.T., O’Leary-Kelly, A.M., Wolf, S., Klein, H.J., & Gardner, P.D. (1994). Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology , 79(5): 730-743. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.5.730 Chang, H. H., Chang, C. M., & Jacobs, R. L. (2009). Relationship between participation in communities of practice and organizational socialization in the early careers of South Korean IT employees. Human Resource Development International , 12(4): 407-427. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678860903135805 Chen, G. (2005). Newcomer adaptation in teams: Multilevel antecedents and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1): 101-116. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.15993147 Chen, J. & Cooper-Thomas, H.D. (2023). Finding one’s own way: How newcomers who differ stay well. Evidence-based HRM: A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship , 11(2): 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-06-2022-0153 Chen, G. & Klimoski, R. J. (2003). The impact of expectations on newcomer performance in teams as mediated by work characteristics, social exchanges, and empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5): 591607. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040651 Chen, N. Y., Tjosvold, D., Huang, X., & Xu, D. (2011). New manager socialization and conflict management in China: Effects of relationship and open conflict values. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(2): 332-356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15591816.2010.00716.x Chi, N.W., Fang, L.C., Shen, C.T., & Fan, H.L. (2020). Detrimental effects of newcomer person-job misfit on actual turnover and International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 44 performance: The buffering role of multidimensional person-environment fit. Applied Psychology , 69(4): 1361-1395. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12225 Choi, Y. & Chung, I.H. (2017). Attraction-selection and socialization of work values: Evidence from longitudinal survey. Public Personnel Management , 46(1): 66-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026017696397 Choi, W., Noe, R., & Cho, Y. (2020). What is responsible for the psychological capital-job performance relationship? An examination of the role of informal learning and person-environment fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 35(4): 279-293. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-2018-0562 Chong, J. X. Y., Beenen, G., Gagné, M., & Dunlop, P. D. (2021). Satisfying newcomers’ needs: The role of socialization tactics and supervisor autonomy support. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(2): 315-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869019-09678-z Çiçek, I. (2023). Organizational identification with the effect of organizational socialization: The validity of social identity theory. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi , 26(1): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.29249/selcuksbmyd.1121576 Cimperman, S. (2023). Informal socialization in virtual work environments: Creating a digital culture of connectivity. Global Business and Organizational Excellence , 43(1): 53-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22197 Cooper-Thomas, H.D. & Anderson, N. (2006). Organizational socialization: A new theoretical model and recommendations for future research and HRM practices in organizations. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 21(5): 492-516. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610673997 Cooper-Thomas, H.D. & Burke, S.E. (2012). Newcomer proactive behavior: Can there be too much of a good thing? In Cameron, K.S., & Martin, M.L. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational socialization : 56-77. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cooper-Thomas, H.D., Van Vianen, A., & Anderson, N. (2004). Changes in person–organization fit: The impact of socialization tactics on perceived and actual P–O fit. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 13(1): 52-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320344000246 Coppe, T., März, V., & Raemdonck, I. (2023). Second career teachers’ work socialization process in TVET: A mixed-method social network perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education , 121, 103914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103914 Cousins, P.D., Handfield, R.B., Lawson, B., and Petersen, K.J. (2006). Creating supply chain relational capital: The impact of formal and informal socialization processes. Journal of Operations Management , 24(6): 851-863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2005.08.007 Cranmer, G.A. (2018). An application of socialization resources theory: Collegiate student-athletes’ team socialization as a function of their social exchanges with coaches and teammates. Communication and Sport , 6(3): 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167479517714458 Cranmer, G.A., Goldman, Z.W., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2017). The mediated relationship between received support and job satisfaction: An initial application of socialization resources theory. Western Journal of Communication , 81(1): 64-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2016.1231931 Dai, X. & Fang, Y. (2023). Does inclusive leadership affect the organizational socialization of newcomers from diverse backgrounds? The mediating role of psychological capital. Frontiers in Psychology , 14, 1138101. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1138101 DeBode, J.D., Mossholder, K.W., & Walker, A.G. (2017). Fulfilling employees’ psychological contracts: Organizational socialization’s role. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 38(1): 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-02-20150014 De Cooman, R., De Gieter, S., Pepermans, R., Hermans, S., Du Bois, C., Caers, R., & Jegers, M. (2009). Person–organization fit: Testing socialization and attraction–selection–attrition hypotheses. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 74(1): 102-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.10.010 Delobbe, N., Cooper-Thomas, H.D., & De Hoe, R. (2016). A new look at the psychological contract during organizational socialization: The role of newcomers’ obligations at entry. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 37(6): 845-867. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2078 Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology , 86(3): 499-512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499 Deng, Y. & Yao, X. (2020). Person-environment fit and proactive socialization: Reciprocal relationships in an academic environment. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 120, 103446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103446 Deng, H., Zhang, Y., Wu, S., Wu, W., Ni, D., & Zhang, X. (2023). Showing commitment or incompetence? When and how newcomers’ information seeking elevates (degrades) task-related outcomes. Journal of Management and Organization , 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2022.91 Dickson, M.W., Resick, C.J., & Hanges, P.J. (2006). When organizational climate is unambiguous, it is also strong. Journal of Applied Psychology , 91(2): 351-364. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.351 Dufour, L., Andiappan, M., & Banoun, A. (2022). Support or evaluate? The multifaceted role of supervisors during the newcomer socialization process. European Management Journal , 40(4): 546-558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.08.006 Edwards, J.R. & Shipp, A.J. (2007). The relationship between person-environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. In Ostroff, C. & Judge, T.A. (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit : 209-258. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ellis, A.M., Bauer, T.N., Mansfield, L.R., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D.M., & Simon, L.S. (2015). Navigating uncharted waters: Newcomer socialization through the lens of stress theory. Journal of Management , 41(1): 203-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314557525 Yu et al. 45 Emerson, R.M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology , 2, 335-362. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.02.080176.002003 Fan, J. & Wanous, J. P. (2008). Organizational and cultural entry: A new type of orientation program for multiple boundary crossings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6): 1390-1400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012828 Fang, R., Duffy, M.K., & Shaw, J.D. (2011). The organizational socialization process: Review and development of a social capital model. Journal of Management , 37(1): 127-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310384630 Fang, R., McAllister, D.J., & Duffy, M.K. (2017). Down but not out: Newcomers can compensate for low vertical access with strong horizontal ties and favorable core self-evaluations. Personnel Psychology , 70(3): 517-555. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12177 Farnese, M. L., Bellò, B., Livi, S., Barbieri, B., & Gubbiotti, P. (2016). Learning the ropes: The protective role of mentoring in correctional police officers’ socialization process. Military Psychology , 28(6): 429-447. https://doi.org/10.1037/mil0000131 Filstad, C. (2004). How newcomers use role models in organizational socialization. Journal of Workplace Learning , 16(7): 396409. https://doi.org/10.1108/13665620410558297 Finkelstein, L. M., Kulas, J. T., & Dages, K. D. (2003). Age differences in proactive newcomer socialization strategies in two populations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17(4): 473-502. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023400201387 French, J.R.P., Rodgers, W.L., & Cobb, S. (1974). Adjustment as person-environment fit. In Coelho, G., Hamburg, D., & Adams, J. (Eds.), Coping and adaptation : 316-333. New York: Basic Books. Fu, C. K., Shaffer, M. A., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Proactive socialization, adjustment, and turnover: A study of self-initiated foreign employees. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1, 18779150. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2005.18779150 Gardner, S.K. (2008). Fitting the mold of graduate school: A qualitative study of socialization in doctoral education. Innovative Higher Education , (33): 125-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-008-9068-x Ghosh, R., Reio Jr, T.G., & Bang, H. (2013). Reducing turnover intent: Supervisor and co-worker incivility and socializationrelated learning. Human Resource Development International , 16(2): 169-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2012.756199 Ghosh, K., Sinha, S., & Sharma, D. (2023). Virtual fun in a virtual workplace: Employee socialization for “work from home”. Benchmarking: An International Journal , 30(10): 4632-4650. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-11-2021-0637 Giberson, T.R., Resick, C.J., & Dickson, M.W. (2005). Embedding leader characteristics: An examination of homogeneity of personality and values in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology , 90(5): 1002-1010. https://doi.org/10.1037/00219010.90.5.1002 Gómez, L.F. (2009). Time to Socialize: Organizational socialization structures and temporality. The Journal of Business Communication, 46(2): 179-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608328077 Gonzalez, E., Leidner, D., Riemenschneider, C., & Koch, H. (2013). The impact of internal social media usage on organizational socialization and commitment. International Conference on Interaction Sciences . Granovetter, M. (1992). Economic institutions as social constructions: A framework for analysis. Acta Sociologica , 35(1): 3-11. Grosskopf, S., Landes, A., & Barmeyer, C. (2022). A black-box yet to be opened: Multi-level processes during migrants’ organizational socialization. Journal of International Migration and Integration , 23(4): 1875-1902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-021-00906-1 Gruman, J. A., Saks, A. M., & Zweig, D. I. (2006). Organizational socialization tactics and newcomer proactive behaviors: An integrative study. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 69(1): 90-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2006.03.001 Guo, Y., Lee, S.K., & Kramer, M.W. (2021). “We work in international companies”: Affordances of communication media in Chinese employees’ organizational socialization. Communication Studies , 72(5): 788-806. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2021.1972019 Haave, H., Kaloudis, A., & Vold, T. (2023). Onboarding and socialization under COVID-19 crisis: A knowledge management perspective. In Bergum, S., Peters, P., & Vold, T. (Eds.), Virtual management and the new normal : 189-204. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06813-3_12 Haldorai, K., Kim, W.G., Phetvaroon, K., & Li, J. (2020). Left out of the office “tribe”: The influence of workplace ostracism on employee work engagement. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management , 32(8): 2717-2735. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2020-0285 Hansen, M.T., Mors, M.L., & Løvås, B. (2005). Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal , 48(5): 776-793. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.18803922 Harrison, S. H., Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2011). Curiosity adapted the cat: The role of trait curiosity in newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1): 211-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021647 Hart, Z. P. & Miller, V. D. (2005). Context and message content during organizational socialization: A research note. Human Communication Research, 31(2): 295-309. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/31.2.295 Haski-Leventhal, D. & Bargal, D. (2008). The volunteer stages and transitions model: Organizational socialization of volunteers. Human Relations , 61(1): 67-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707085946 Hatmaker, D.M. (2015). Bringing networks in: A model of organizational socialization in the public sector. Public Management Review , 17(8): 1146-1164. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.895029 Hayashi, S. (2013). Organizational socialization and collective self-esteem as drivers of organizational identification. International Business Research , 6(12): 156-167. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v6n12p156 He, H., Gao, J., & Yan, L. (2020). Understanding career advancement of newcomers from perspective of organizational socialization: A moderated mediating model. Chinese Management Studies , 14(3): 789-809. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS03-2019-0116 International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences 46 Hirst, A. & Humphreys, M. (2020). Finding ourSelves in space: Identity and spatiality. In Brown, A.D. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of identities in organizations : 698-714. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198827115.013.2 Hobfoll, S.E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist , 44(3): 513524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513 Hogg, M.A. & Terry, D.J. (2001). Social identity theory and organizational processes. In Hogg, M.A. & Terry, D.J. (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts : 1-12. Philadelphia: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315800530 Homans, G.C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology , 63(6): 597-606. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2772990 Hooghe, L. (2005). Several roads lead to international norms, but few via international socialization: A case study of the European commission. International Organization , 59(4): 861–898. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3877831 Hsiung, T. L. & Hsieh, A. T. (2003). Newcomer socialization: The role of job standardization. Public Personnel Management , 32(4): 579-589. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102600303200408 James, T.L., Lowry, P.B., Wallace, L., & Warkentin, M. (2017). The effect of belongingness on obsessive-compulsive disorder in the use of online social networks. Journal of Management Information Systems , 34(2): 560-596. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2017.1334496 Jia, H., Zhong, R., & Xie, X. (2021). Helping others makes me fit better: Effects of helping behavior by newcomers and coworkerattributed motives on newcomers’ adjustment. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(3): 401416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-020-09680-w Jiang, B., Kumar, T., Rehman, N., Hameed, R., Kiziloglu, M., & Israr, A. (2022). Role of psychological contracts in enhancing employee creativity through knowledge sharing: Do boundary conditions of organization’s socialization and work-related curiosity matter? Frontiers in Psychology , 13, 834041. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.834041 Jokisaari, M. (2013). The role of leader–member and social network relations in newcomers’ role performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 82(2): 96-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.01.002 Jokisaari, M. & Nurmi, J.-E. (2009). Change in newcomers' supervisor support and socialization outcomes after organizational entry. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3): 527-544. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.41330971 Jokisaari, M. & Nurmi, J.E. (2012). Getting the right connections? The consequences and antecedents of social networks in newcomer socialization. In Wanberg, C. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational socialization : 78-96. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jokisaari, M. & Vuori, J. (2014). Joint effects of social networks and information giving on innovative performance after organizational entry. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 85(3): 352-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.08.007 Jokisaari, M. & Vuori, J. (2018). Leaders’ resources and newcomer socialization: The importance of delegation. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 33(2): 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-09-2016-0274 Kammeyer-Mueller, J.D., Schilpzand, P., & Rubenstein, A.L. (2012). Dyadic fit and the process of organizational socialization. In Kristof-Brown, A.L. & Billsberry, J. (Eds.), Organizational fit: Key issues and new directions : 50-73. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118320853.ch3 Kammeyer-Mueller, J.D., Simon, L.S., & Rich, B.L. (2012). The psychic cost of doing wrong: Ethical conflict, divestiture socialization, and emotional exhaustion. Journal of Management , 38(3): 784-808. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310381133 Karam, A., Ashill, N., Jayashree, P., & Lindsay, V. (2023). Localization in the United Arab Emirates: A study of stereotypes, organizational socialization, employability and work outcomes. Personnel Review , 52(5): 1362-1386. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2021-0548 Kašpárková, L., Vaculík, M., Procházka, J., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2018). Why resilient workers perform better: The roles of job satisfaction and work engagement. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health , 33(1): 43-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2018.1441719 Katz, R. (1980). Time and work: Toward an integrative perspective. Research in Organizational Behavior , 2, 81-127. Khorramabad, I. (2021). The impact of person-organization fit on the responsibility of nurses in Asalian Hospital by explaining the mediating role of organizational socialization. Quarterly Journal of Nursing Management , 10(3): 22-36. Kim, T.Y., Cable, D.M., & Kim, S.P. (2005). Socialization tactics, employee proactivity, and person-organization fit. Journal of Applied Psychology , 90(2): 232-241. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.232 Kim, K. & Moon, H.K. (2021). How do socialization tactics and supervisor behaviors influence newcomers’ psychological contract formation? The mediating role of information acquisition. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 32(6): 1312-1338. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1521460 Kim, Y., Wang, Y., & Oh, J. (2016). Digital media use and social engagement: How social media and smartphone use influence social activities of college students. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking , 19(4): 264-269. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0408 Kitchenham, B.A., Brereton, O.P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology , 51(1): 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.008 Kjeldsen, A.M. & Jacobsen, C.B. (2013). Public service motivation and employment sector: attraction or socialization? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory , 23(4): 899-926. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus039 Klein, H. J., Fan, J., & Preacher, K. J. (2006). The effects of early socialization experiences on content mastery and outcomes: A mediational approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1): 96-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.02.001 PRISMA Checklist Appendix-I 53 Section and Topic Item # Checklist item Location where item is reported 24c Describe and explain any amendments to information provided at registration or in the protocol. n/a Support 25 Describe sources of financial or non-financial support for the review, and the role of the funders or sponsors in the review. n/a Competing interests 26 Declare any competing interests of review authors. n/a Availability of data, code and other materials 27 Report which of the following are publicly available and where they can be found: template data collection forms; data extracted from included studies; data used for all analyses; analytic code; any other materials used in the review. n/a