Human Resource Management - 2012 - Claus Wehner - Graduates reactions to recruitment process outsourcing A scenario‐based

GRADUATES’ REACTIONS
TO RECRUITMENT PROCESS
OUTSOURCING: A SCENARIO-
BASED STUDY
MARIUS CLAUS WEHNER, ANGELO GIARDINI,
AND RÜDIGER KABST
This study examines how successive outsourcing of recruitment activities

to an external provider—also known as recruitment process outsourcing
(RPO)—affects graduates’ reactions. Using an experimental scenario tech-
nique, a total of 158 graduates participated in four hypothetical scenarios
that have been developed as an experimental between-subject design. Re-
sults provide support for negative effects of the extent of RPO on graduates’
satisfaction with the recruitment process and company attractiveness. More-
over, mediated by graduates’ satisfaction with the recruitment process and
company attractiveness, an increasing extent of RPO negatively influences
job-acceptance intentions. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Keywords: outsourcing, recruitment, selection, applicant reaction
Introduction (e.g., Gatewood, Gowan, & Lautenschlager,

ttracting and selecting talented and 1993; Powell, 1984), the attention has re-
A well-educated applicants is an im-

portant challenge for organizations
(Michaels, Handfield-Jones, &
Axelrod, 2001). Therefore, predic-
tors of applicants’ job choice have always
been a central topic in research on personnel
selection. Whereas early studies focus on the
cently shifted toward the importance of the
recruitment process (Chapman, Uggerslev,
Carroll, Piasentin, & Jones, 2005; Chapman &
Webster, 2006; Hausknecht, Day, & Thomas,
2004). In this regard, critical contact theory
proposes that the way applicants are treated
and selected during the recruitment process
importance of job attributes and organiza- is important for their job choice (Behling,
tional characteristics for applicants’ job choice Labovitz, & Gainer, 1968). Critical contact
Correspondence to: Marius Claus Wehner, University of Giessen, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration,
Licher Str. 62, 35394 Giessen, Germany, Phone: 49 (0)641 99 22102, Fax: 49 (0)641 99 22109, E-mail: marius.wehner@
wirtschaft.uni-giessen.de.
Human Resource Management, July–August 2012, Vol. 51, No. 4. Pp. 601–624
© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).
DOI:10.1002/hrm.21490
1099050x, 2012, 4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hrm.21490 by University of Liege Library Léon Graulich, Wiley Online Library on [06/11/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
602 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, JULY–AUGUST 2012
theorists believe that candidates make their have been widely acknowledged (e.g., Gainey
decision based on critical contact elements & Klaas, 2003; Klaas, McClendon, & Gainey,
due to limited information (Behling et al., 1999).
1968; Pounder & Merrill, 2001). These ele- Notwithstanding its important insights,
ments are, for instance, persons who have past research has not considered the appli-
first contact with the applicants, the build- cant’s perspective to explain whether out-
ings, or a firm’s efficiency in processing the sourcing of HR recruitment practices also has
applications (Behling et al., 1968), even negative consequences. Critical contact the-
though these elements are independent from ory suggests that applicants evaluate the initial
long-term employment satisfaction. Thus, contact with an organization (Behling et al.,
the intention to accept a job offer is mainly 1968). The crucial factor is that the potential
driven by the initial contact with the organi- employer has to value and esteem its appli-
zation (Pounder & Merrill, 2001; Schwab, cants. Almost half a century ago, Gerstner
Rynes, & Aldag, 1987). (1966) summarized the view of a graduate as
Consequently, organizations put much the following, “What’s more, they’ve shown
effort into conducting fair, transparent, and a real interest in me and it looks like a good
professional recruitment pro- opportunity” (p. 6). If an organization deliv-
cesses to send positive signals to ers parts of its recruitment activities to an
Notwithstanding its
their applicants (e.g., Lievens, Van external provider, the organization alters the
important insights, Hoye, & Anseel, 2007; Turban, prerequisites of the initial contact with its ap-
Forret, & Hendrickson, 1998). plicants because a third-party company is
past research has While some organizations try to involved. For instance, if the external pro-
achieve this purpose by develop- vider conducts the preselection and/or tele-
not considered ing and investing in their own phone interview, the initial contact is made
the applicant’s personnel recruitment, an increas- between external provider and applicant in-
ing number of organizations del- stead of between the potential employer and
perspective to egate parts of their recruiting ac- applicant. Consequently, applicants may not
tivities to external providers of HR have a sense of being valued, which in turn
explain whether services (e.g., Dasborough & Sue- may negatively influence their perception of
Chan, 2002; Ordanini & Silvestri, the employer or the job. Thus, the outsourc-
outsourcing of
2008). Besides outsourcing of ing company (i.e., potential employer) runs
HR recruitment other HR practices (e.g., payroll, the risk of sending unintended or even nega-
benefits, and training and devel- tive signals to applicants and losing the best
practices also opment), recruitment and selec- candidates for a job vacancy (Giardini &
tion belongs to those HR activities Kabst, 2008; Ployhart & Ryan, 1998; Smither,
has negative
that are most frequently out- Reilly, Millsap, Pearlman, & Stoffey, 1993).
consequences. sourced (cf. Galanaki & Papalex- The contribution of this study is on the
andris, 2005; Shen, 2005). Recruit- link between selection procedures and appli-
ment and selection practices need cants’ reactions by investigating a contextual
to be conducted regularly due to employee characteristic that has rarely been studied so
turnover and the growth of organizations. far—the outsourcing of the HR recruitment
Moreover, they are highly standardized and and selection process. In particular, we argue
the performance of an external provider is that the higher the extent to which an exter-
easy to control by a client. As a result, organi- nal provider (visibly) carries out recruitment
zations outsource their HR activities in order activities for an organization (e.g., handling
to save costs (Byham & Riddle, 1999), en- of applications, screening and preselection of
hance the efficiency and quality of their HR candidates, first interviews), the more nega-
activities, and allow the HR function to focus tive are applicants’ reactions toward the se-
on strategic issues (Belcourt, 2006; Cooke, lection procedure, the organization, and the
Shen, & McBride, 2005; Delmotte & Sels, job. To this end, we developed an experimen-
2008). These advantages of HR outsourcing tal between-subject design consisting of four
Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

RECRUITMENT PROCESS OUTSOURCING 603
academic research. While some studies fo-

Company cused on the determinants of HR outsourc-
Attractiveness
H2: H3:
ing such as transaction costs (e.g., Aubert,
Rivard, & Patry, 1996; Klaas et al., 1999),
Job-
organizational characteristics (e.g., Klaas,
Extent of Acceptance McClendon, & Gainey, 2001), and institu-
RPO Intention
tional factors (e.g., Ang & Cummings, 1997;
Dasborough & Sue-Chan, 2002), other stud-
H1:
Satisfaction with ies focused on its outcomes such as organiza-
the Recruitment tional performance (e.g., Gilley, Greer, &
Process
Rasheed, 2004), client satisfaction (e.g.,
FIGURE 1. Hypothesized Research Model Gainey & Klaas, 2003), perceived benefits
(e.g., Klaas et al., 1999), and employee per-
Note: Illustrated is the hypothesized research model. Continuous ceptions (e.g., Kessler, Coyle-Shapiro, & Pur-
lines indicate hypothesized direct effects (H1 and H2); dashed lines
indicate the hypothesized indirect effect (H3). cell, 1999).Whereas these studies predomi-
nantly examined the advantages, HR
outsourcing also has negative consequences
hypothetical recruitment scenarios. In these for the client company—for example, un-
scenarios, we kept other influential factors foreseen higher costs, endangering employee
constant, such as job attributes and organiza- morale, and losing internal knowledge and
tional characteristics of the potential em- expertise (Belcourt, 2006; Cooke et al., 2005;
ployer and external provider. The main Shen, 2005).
constructs and hypothesized relationships of
our study are depicted in Figure 1.
Outsourcing of Recruitment
and Selection: Past Research
Outsourcing of HR Practices and Empirical Evidence
Since the mid-1990s, the academic literature While previous research focused on outsourc-
recognized that outsourcing of HR activities, ing of HR activities in general, little attention
as a whole or in parts, has rapidly increased has been specifically given to outsourcing of
(Greer, Youngblood, & Gray, 1999). In 1996, recruitment and selection. To our knowledge,
between 77 percent (American Management only four empirical studies explicitly focused
Association survey) and 93 percent (Hewitt As- on this part of HR outsourcing. First, Lever
sociates survey) of the organizations in the (1997) showed that outsourcing of recruit-
United States outsourced at least one HR ac- ment and selection is positively correlated
tivity (Greer et al., 1999, p. 85). After the turn with frequent complaints during the imple-
of the century, HR outsourcing was most com- mentation. Second, Klaas, McClendon, and
mon in the United States (87 percent of the Gainey (2001) found that outsourcing of re-
firms) and Canada (71 percent), but also in- cruitment is predominantly used in the trade
creasingly widespread in Europe (57 percent) industry. Moreover, a strategic involvement
(Ordanini & Silvestri, 2008, pp. 372–373). A of the HR function positively influences
study by Galanaki and Papalexandris (2005) the usage of outsourcing in this area. Third,
shows that outsourcing of HR activities (e.g., Dasborough and Sue-Chan (2002) showed
pay and benefits, training and development, that trust and mimetic forces positively influ-
and recruitment and selection) is particularly ence the usage of outsourcing the recruit-
widespread in Western and Eastern European ment, while coercive forces (e.g., legislation)
countries as well as in Australia (over 80 per- have a negative impact. Finally, the study by
cent), Israel (over 50 percent), and Japan Ordanini and Silvestri (2008) indicates that
(over 20 percent). firms outsource administrative parts of their
Consequently, the HR outsourcing phe- recruitment (e.g., job advertisement and pre-
nomenon found increasing attention in screening) due to efficiency reasons, whereas

strategic parts of the recruitment (i.e., collo- In summary, despite the fact that recruit-
quia and selection) were predominantly out- ment and selection is important for organiza-
sourced due to competitive reasons. tions (e.g., Michaels et al., 2001), especially
In a similar vein, Byham and Riddle for attracting well-educated graduates (e.g.,
(1999) describe the advantages and disadvan- Rynes & Boudreau, 1986; Turban & Dough-
tages of outsourcing the recruitment. For ex- erty, 1991, 1992), there is empirical evidence
ample, since the client company is able to that organizations increasingly deliver these
diminish its own administrative staff needed important activities to external providers in
for recruiting, a decrease in costs per hire is a order to reduce their own staff and costs.
primary benefit for organizations. Other ben- However, research concerning the influence of
efits are the access to external knowledge, outsourcing on the most important group
industry expertise, and higher efficiency, of people with regard to recruitment is still
which additionally reduces hiring and ad- lacking—the applicants.
ministrative costs as well as the time to hire
(Byham & Riddle, 1999). However, there are
Recruitment Process Outsourcing
potential disadvantages—for example, losing
well-trained staff and organizational skills in a In line with previous research on HR busi-
critical area (cf. Byham & Riddle, ness process outsourcing (e.g., Budhwar,
Despite the fact 1999, pp. 50–52). Luthar, & Bhatnagar, 2006; Conklin, 2005)
Beyond academic research, and practitioner literature (e.g., Berkowitz,
that recruitment outsourcing providers steadily pre- 2005; Syedain, 2008), we define recruitment
dict an increase in outsourcing of process outsourcing (RPO) as an outsourcing of
and selection recruitment and selection (e.g., any activity concerning recruitment and se-
is important for Berkowitz, 2005; Lawler, Ulrich, lection. The recruitment process basically
Fitz-enz, Madden, & Maruca, 2004, consists of four main recruitment activities:
organizations, p. 73; Syedain, 2008). For exam- job advertisement, preselection of candi-
ple, based on 536 senior HR man- dates, telephone interview, and in-person
especially for agers from America, Europe, the job interview (cf. Barber, 1998). In this re-
Middle East, Africa, and Asia Pa- gard, Ordanini and Silvestri (2008) differen-
attracting well-
cific, in 2010 the Kelly Outsourc- tiate between four phases of outsourcing the
educated graduates, ing and Consulting Group recruitment process: job posting and adver-
(KellyOCG), in association with tising (19.2 percent only outsource this part
there is empirical the Human Resources Outsourcing of the recruitment process), prescreening
Association (HROA), reports that and database management (12 percent out-
evidence that
recruitment is the predominant source this part in addition to the previous
organizations HR activity for outsourcing (be- phase), design of selection procedure and
tween 67 and 71 percent among tests (10.7 percent in addition to the previ-
increasingly deliver all regions; KellyOCG & HROA, ous two phases), and colloquia and selection
2010, p. 17), especially among (9.1 percent outsource their recruitment
these important
larger firms and industry sectors completely).
activities to external such as Utilities, IT&T, and Health Similarly, Byham and Riddle (1999) de-
(KellyOCG & HROA, 2010, p. 20). scribe five different levels of outsourcing the
providers in order Among all regions, the average recruitment and selection. In the lowest
costs per hire are between US level, the client company is responsible for all
to reduce their own $2,500 and US$3,500 (1,800 euros recruiting activities and only delivers admin-
staff and costs. and 2,500 euros); thus, the main istrative parts of the recruitment to an exter-
reason for an outsourcing decision nal provider (e.g., administer the recruiting
is to save costs. Further, companies and selection process, design the selection
expect to decrease the time to hire and to get instruments). In the highest level, the exter-
access to highly skilled staff through multiple nal provider becomes a strategic partner and
sourcing channels (KellyOCG & HROA, 2010). gains responsibility for all recruiting activities

of the client on a permanent basis (Byham & Theory and Hypotheses

Riddle, 1999, pp. 48–50).
According to these considerations, we Critical contact theory (Behling et al., 1968)
define extent of RPO as the number of recruit- is one of the dominant theories that describes
ing activities that an organization delegates and explains applicant reactions to recruit-
to an external provider. For example, if an ment and selection procedures. Proponents
organization delegates the job advertisement of critical contact theory (cf. Behling et al.,
to an external provider but conducts the re- 1968, pp. 17–18) suggest that young appli-
maining three recruitment activities by inter- cants (e.g., college graduates, students) are
nal employees, we speak of a low extent of incapable to differentiate among several job
RPO. In contrast, if an organization delegates offers due to their limited work experience.
the job advertisement, preselection, and tele- Instead, young applicants grasp at
phone interview to an external provider, this critical contact elements to evaluate
would be an example of a high extent of recruitment processes and em- If clients force
RPO. The basic assumption of our study is ployers. Critical contact elements
external providers
that the extent of RPO is apparent to appli- are, for example, the building of a
cants. Although empirical evidence on how company, the personal impres- to make RPO
RPO is exactly used by organizations is lack- sion of the recruiter, and a com-
ing, we assume that RPO is apparent to ap- pany’s efficiency in processing the as seamless as
plicants for two reasons. First, the study by application (Behling et al., 1968).
Ordanini and Silvestri (2008) indicates that Applicants hold on to these criti- possible, the
the majority of organizations outsource job cal contact elements “because question arises why
postings and advertisements as well as prese- [they] are the only tangible means
lection procedures. Then, the external pro- of differentiating among the of- clients would do so.
vider is in charge of the job advertisement in fers” (Behling et al., 1968, p. 17).
newspapers and/or online job portals. The Applicants rely on their personal In order to answer
job description usually contains the job re- impressions during the initial
this question, our
quirements of the potential employer as well contact with the potential em-
as contact details of the external provider but ployer to make their job choice. study reveals who is
does not explicitly mention the name of the In a similar vein, signal theory
potential employer. In these cases, if candi- (Rynes, Bretz, & Gerhardt, 1991) actually conducting
dates apply for a job, RPO is completely ap- suggests that applicants interpret
which parts of the
parent to applicants. their perceptions and experiences
Second, a possible pitfall of outsourcing during the recruitment process as recruitment process.
recruitment and selection is that the first per- signals of unobservable character-
son who meets the candidates does not actu- istics of the organization (Ryan &
ally work for the potential employer (Byham Ployhart, 2000; Rynes, Heneman, & Schwab,
& Riddle, 1999, p. 52). Thus, the client is de- 1980). Based on these perceptions, applicants
pendent on the external provider’s credibility conclude how it would be like to work for the
because the external provider has to represent organization (Chapman & Webster, 2006,
“the client in a positive and professional pp. 1036–1037).
way” (Byham & Riddle, 1999, p. 52). There- We suggest that RPO causes negative ap-
fore, it is reasonable to assume that compa- plicant reactions to the recruitment process
nies will try to minimize or even avoid candi- because RPO does not correspond with ap-
dates’ perception of RPO during the plicants’ expectations about the initial con-
recruitment process. However, if clients force tact. Applicants have expectations about the
external providers to make RPO as seamless as recruitment process and forthcoming selec-
possible, the question arises why clients tion procedures (Chapman & Webster, 2006;
would do so. In order to answer this question, Stevens, 1997)—for example, the chance to
our study reveals who is actually conducting show their talent and to convince the recruiter
which parts of the recruitment process. of what they are worth (Schreurs, Derous,

Proos, Notelaers, & De Witte, 2008). Implic- RPO delays and hampers the personal con-
itly, applicants expect to demonstrate their tact between applicant and employer. Conse-
talent to persons who are working for the quently, applicants may negatively evaluate
employer. Conversely, applicants expect to the involvement of third persons, which
get to know the employees of the potential in turn causes negative applicant reactions to
employer (e.g., the recruiter or future cowork- the recruitment process.
ers) and to get a subjective impression about
what it is like to work for the organization Hypothesis 1: The extent of recruitment process
(Behling et al., 1968). RPO violates these ex- outsourcing is negatively related to applicants’
pectations about the initial contact because satisfaction with the recruitment process.
RPO implies that the initial con-
If employees of the tact takes place between the appli- Given that applicants have a presump-
cant and the external provider and tion neither about the external provider’s
potential employer not between the applicant and the qualification nor about the public image of
employer. Consequently, due to the employer, RPO may send negative signals
conduct all parts
RPO the initial contact does not that directly influence company attractive-
of the recruitment meet applicants’ expectations, ness. Previous work has shown that applicants
which in turn leads to disap- interpret treatments during the recruitment
process, the pointment and negative appli- process as signals of unobservable organiza-
cant reaction. tional characteristics (e.g., Chapman & Web-
contact with the Moreover, RPO delays and ster, 2006; Ryan & Ployhart, 2000; Rynes &
employer is direct, hampers the initial contact with Barber, 1990; Rynes et al., 1991). This signal
the employer, which may be eval- effect is even stronger the less applicants
exclusive, and uated as negative by applicants. know about the organization before the re-
Advocates of critical contact the- cruitment process (Gatewood et al., 1993;
personal because ory suggest that applicants need Rynes et al., 1991). If the preferred employer
to “feel” a real interest by the em- processes all applications with its own em-
the same people
ployer (Gerstner, 1966, p. 5). If ployees (i.e., personally), this should send
are responsible employees of the potential em- a positive signal to applicants because the
ployer conduct all parts of the re- employer shows a personal interest in every
for sending the cruitment process, the contact with single applicant.
the employer is direct, exclusive, In contrast, RPO is an organizational in-
confirmation of
and personal because the same strument to reduce costs per hire and time to
receipt, conducting people are responsible for sending hire and to manage hundreds or thousands
the confirmation of receipt, con- of applications per year more effectively and
the telephone ducting the telephone interview, efficiently. Smaller RPO contracts contain
and welcoming the applicants for between 50 and 2,000 hires per year (Syedain,
interview, and
the in-person job interviews. Alto- 2008, p. 5), whereas larger firms have consid-
welcoming the gether, this would mean that the erably more. We suggest that applicants an-
potential employer shows a real ticipate this organizational rationale for RPO.
applicants for interest and values the applicants. If the preferred employer assigns parts of the
In contrast, if a third-party com- recruitment process to an external provider,
the in-person job pany is involved in the recruit- the employer no longer deals personally with
interviews. ment process, the initial contact every application. Applicants could judge
with the potential employer is such an assembly line–like recruitment pro-
neither direct nor exclusive. Per- cess and inconsistency in administration as an
sons other than the actual employees of the impersonal behavior of the employer. Thus,
potential employer are involved in the re- RPO may send negative signals to applicants
cruitment process, make decisions about ap- who make negative inferences about the po-
plicants’ qualifications, and give second- tential employer as a whole (e.g., Chapman &
hand information about the employer; thus, Webster, 2006).

Hypothesis 2: The extent of recruitment pro- scenarios (see below). The final size of the four
cess outsourcing is negatively related to company scenario groups ranged from n 38 to n 41.
attractiveness. Fifty-three percent (n 81) were females. The
average age of the participants was 24.2 years,
Meta-analytic results by Chapman et al. their average number of semesters was 7.4
(2005) have established that the perception (min 5 and max 17), and their average
and evaluation of the recruitment process is working experience (including internships) was
positively related to organizational attractive- 2.6 years. We paid a lot of attention to the
ness and job-acceptance intentions. The eval- working experience and the number of semes-
uation of the recruitment process influences ters because we wanted to ensure that the
company attractiveness (Chapman et al., participants had necessary prior experiences
2005; Ryan & Ployhart, 2000; Rynes et al., about real recruitment processes. Moreover,
1991). In turn, company attractiveness posi- respondents should be close to the end of
tively influences job-acceptance intentions their studies to ensure that the topic of appli-
(Chapman & Webster, 2006; Highhouse, cations and recruitment is sufficiently impor-
Lievens, & Sinar, 2003) because applicants tant to the respondents.
only accept job offers from companies that We decided to survey master-
are perceived as attractive (Highhouse et al., level students close to graduation
RPO may have a
2003). Consequently, if RPO negatively influ- because they are potential job
ences applicants’ satisfaction with the re- seekers and therefore the most negative indirect
cruitment process as well as company attrac- relevant population for our
tiveness, it seems likely that the effect of RPO research question. Petty and effect on job-
on job-acceptance intention would be medi- Cacioppo (1979) suggest that per-
ated by satisfaction with the recruitment sonal importance of a message is acceptance
process and company attractiveness. Thus, strongly related to a person’s in- intention, thereby
RPO may have a negative indirect effect on volvement, which in turn influ-
job-acceptance intention, thereby resulting ences and motivates cognitive resulting in adverse
in adverse consequences for the organization processes (for an overview, see
such as premature withdrawal of disap- meta-analysis by Johnson and consequences for
pointed applicants (Hülsheger & Anderson, Eagly [1989]). The topic of send-
the organization
2009), losing the best candidates for a job ing applications to companies
(Ployhart & Ryan, 1998), and/or rejection of and participating in recruitment such as premature
job offers (Smither et al., 1993). processes is especially important
for students close to graduation withdrawal of
Hypothesis 3: Applicants’ satisfaction with the (i.e., job seekers). Therefore, with
disappointed
recruitment process and company attractiveness regard to our research topic, we
will mediate the relationship between the extent of suggest that a student sample has applicants, losing
recruitment process outsourcing and job-acceptance a higher involvement than other
intention. persons. Moreover, prominent re- the best candidates
search about recruitment prac-
for a job, and/or
tices, company attractiveness, and
applicants’ reaction has focused
Method rejection of job
on student samples from colleges
Sample and Procedure or universities (Allen, Mahto, & offers.
Otondo, 2007; Collins, 2007;
The study was presented as a survey of appli- Collins & Stevens, 2002; Powell &
cants’ evaluation of recruiting processes. A Goulet, 1996; Turban, 2001).
total of 158 business administration students Furthermore, if causal relationships are in
participated in this survey at a German univer- the focus of laboratory settings, a (causally)
sity. The participants were randomly assigned homogenous sample of students is acceptable
to one of the four different between-subject or even desirable (Calder, Phillips, & Tybout,

1981). Highhouse (2009) emphasized that The participants in the main study were
laboratory settings are designed to apply asked to put themselves into the situation of
theory and to explain behavior. In this case, a person applying for a job vacancy in the
it is of less importance whether a specific fictive company called Liebermann Ltd. Job
sample represents the population because characteristics were held constant by outlin-
“any sample within the theory’s domain is a ing that the position relates exactly to the
relevant sample” (Calder et al., 1981; High- expectations and abilities of the participant.
house, 2009, p. 556). Since our study is a The four scenarios described the recruit-
laboratory setting, we apply critical contact ment process from the applicant’s point of
and signal theory, and we are interested in view, and every scenario consisted of the
theoretical relationships, students are appro- same four steps: (1) a job advertisement,
priate research subjects (Berthon, Ewing, & (2) confirmation of receipt and preselection,
Hah, 2005; Calder et al., 1981; Highhouse & (3) a telephone interview, and (4) an in-person
Gillespie, 2009). job interview. In scenario 1, all the aforemen-
tioned recruiting activities (1–4) were per-
formed by Liebermann Ltd. In scenario 2,
Scenarios
steps 1 and 2 were performed by the fictive
The scenarios consisted of a description of a external provider Personnel Ltd., and steps 3
hypothetical application and recruitment and 4 were conducted by Liebermann Ltd. In
process. Appendix A presents the complete scenario 3, the external provider Personnel
first scenario with no RPO (i.e., Ltd. additionally performed the telephone
Past research lowest extent of RPO) and the interview. In scenario 4, all four steps in the
fourth scenario with the highest recruiting process were conducted by the ex-
indicates that extent of RPO. The participants ternal provider. To ensure a realistic process,
had to respond to a series of ques- the job interview was conducted together
the use of tions that tested their evaluation with members of Liebermann Ltd. The sce-
of the recruitment process, narios with the lowest and highest degree of
written scenarios
the company, and their intention RPO are presented in Appendix A.
is a suitable to accept the job offer (cf. Comparing the scenarios (see Appendix A),
Giardini & Kabst, 2008). we only changed the name of the company
methodology for Past research indicates that that was conducting a specific part of the re-
the use of written scenarios is a cruitment process. This allows us to hold
theory testing as
suitable methodology for theory other influential factors constant, such as job
long as participants testing as long as participants are characteristics, quality of advertisement, re-
confronted with situations that cruiter’s behavior, interviewer’s friendliness,
are confronted with are realistic and that they experi- professionalism of the external provider, em-
ence on a regular basis (Maute & ployer’s image, and/or efficiency of process-
situations that are
Dubé, 1999; Schmitt, Dubé, & ing the applications. Thus, respondents only
realistic and that Leclerc, 1992; Thaler, 1985). Thus, perceive the stimulus of who is responsible
hypothetical settings are suitable for a specific part of the recruitment process
they experience on for discovering the same relation- (i.e., the external provider Personnel Ltd. or
ships between predictors and de- the potential employer Liebermann Ltd.).
a regular basis. pendent variables like field studies At the end of the questionnaire, we con-
(Hausknecht et al., 2004), although ducted a manipulation check. First, we asked
the relationships tend to be some- participants to think about the recruitment
what stronger in hypothetical settings (Haus- scenario again and then to explain which
knecht et al., 2004), indicating a risk of over- phases of the recruitment process (i.e., job ad-
estimating effects. For this study, we vertisement, confirmation of receipt and prese-
performed think-aloud interviews with stu- lection, telephone interview, and in-person
dents to check how well the scenarios are job interview) were conducted by which com-
understood. pany. Response format was “Liebermann

Ltd.,” “Personnel Ltd.,” and “I don’t know.” Controls

For our analyses, we only took those ques-
tionnaires into account that were answered In order to control for other influences in
correctly. linear regression analyses, we considered sev-
eral control variables. We accounted for the
involvement and personal importance of
Measures the participants by asking whether the stu-
In order to measure company attractiveness dents are searching for a job at the moment
and job-acceptance intention, we used exist- (0 no, 1 yes). Moreover, we considered
ing measures from the study by Highhouse, age, gender (0 female, 1 male), years of job
Lievens, and Sinar (2003). However, appro- experience, and the number of remaining semes-
priate scales for the overall satisfaction with ters as influential factors.
the recruitment process were not available;
thus, we developed scales on the basis of re- Analytical Procedures
lated constructs to satisfaction regarding
recruiting activities from previous research To estimate and analyze our hypothetical
(e.g., Allen, Van Scotter, & Otondo, 2004). research model, structural equation model-
ing (SEM) based on the Mplus software was
used. In addition, we applied a two-stage ap-
Extent of Recruitment Process Outsourcing
proach as suggested by Anderson and Gerb-
We assume that the four scenarios are ranked ing (1988). In the first step, we estimated
(1 = no RPO to 4 = highest extent of RPO), and the measurement model, which only con-
thus the RPO variable was included as an ob- tains bivariate correlations among the latent
served, ordinal scaled variable into the model. constructs and factor loadings, but no re-
gression effects. In the second step, we esti-
mated the SEM with our hypothesized re-
Satisfaction With the Recruitment Process
gression effects. As recommended in the
Overall satisfaction with the recruitment literature, chi-square statistics and fit indi-
process was measured by three items (e.g., ces were used to evaluate the model fit of
“All in all, I am satisfied with the recruitment both the measurement model and the SEM
process”). The Cronbach’s alpha of the scale (Bentler, 1990; Bollen, 1989; Brown &
was .77. The response format ranged from Cudeck, 1993; Hu & Bentler, 1995, 1998;
1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). Tucker & Lewis, 1973). The chi-square statis-
tic tests the differences between observed
and estimated covariance matrices and
Company Attractiveness
should be nonsignificant (Bollen, 1989; Hu &
We adapted three items from Highhouse et al. Bentler, 1995). Overall fit measures such as
(2003) (e.g., “This company is attractive to the Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) and Compara-
me as a place for employment”). The Cron- tive Fit Index (CFI) should have values
bach’s alpha of the scale was .90. The re- above .95. Moreover, the standardized root
sponse format ranged from 1 (completely mean square residuals (SRMR) and the
disagree) to 7 (completely agree). root mean squared error of approximation
(RMSEA) should be below .06 (Brown &
Cudeck, 1993; Hu & Bentler, 1998).
Job-Acceptance Intention
To analyze other influential factors, we
Again, we adapted three items from High- used multiple linear regression analyses with
house et al. (2003) (e.g., “I would accept a job controls. For all models (A1–C2) depicted in
offer from this company”). The Cronbach’s Table III, we calculated the variance inflation
alpha of the scale was .84. The response for- factor (VIF) to check for potential multicol-
mat ranged from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 linearity (Allison, 1999; Hair, Black, Babin, &
(completely agree). Anderson, 2008). The highest VIF was 1.58,

which does not indicate a severe threat of a construct above .50 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988;
multicollinearity (Hair et al., 2008). Fornell & Larcker, 1981); thus, the results
provide support for discriminant validity.
Third, the results of the confirmatory fac-
Results
tor analysis for our model 2 provided support
Measurement Model for all measurement scales. All standardized
factor loadings are above .7, except for one
The measurement model is appropriate to item of the construct satisfaction with the re-
conduct a confirmatory factor analysis and cruitment process that has a loading of only
to evaluate the factor loadings, convergent .55. However, all scales have satisfactory reli-
validity, and discriminant validity of our la- abilities (Cronbach’s alpha .7); therefore,
tent constructs. First, to examine convergent we left the scales unchanged.
validity of our measures, we developed two
alternative measurement models. Model 1
Hypotheses Testing
consists of a unidimensional first-
order factor that accounts for the Table I shows the means, standard devia-
variance among all nine items and tions, and correlations between the study
The measurement
our manifest stimulus variable. variables. Extent of RPO is negatively corre-
model is appropriate Model 2 consists of three first-order lated with all of our hypothesized variables,
factors as well as correlations be- while company attractiveness has the highest
to conduct a tween these factors and our mani- positive correlation with job-acceptance in-
fest stimulus variable. The com- tentions. Moreover, extent of RPO is nega-
confirmatory parison of model 1 (χ2 203.30, tively correlated with the control variable
factor analysis and df 35, CFI .80, TLI .74, searching for a job. This underscores our argu-
RMSEA .17, SRMR .09) and ment that personal importance of a message
to evaluate the model 2 (χ2 32.03, df 30, is important for cognitive processes. The
CFI .99, TLI .99, RMSEA .02, other control variables have limited or no
factor loadings, SRMR .04) indicates that the pre- correlations with our hypothesized variables.
convergent validity,
ferred model is model 2 because it To analyze the negative correlations of
has a lower chi-square statistic and RPO with the hypothesized variables more in
and discriminant higher fit indices. Moreover, all depth, we examined the mean values for the
paths from the latent first-order two dependent variables satisfaction with
validity of our latent factors to the items are highly sig- the recruitment process and company attractive-
nificant (p .001). Thus, both the ness within the four scenarios (i.e., from (1)
constructs.
model comparison and the highly no RPO to (4) highest extent of RPO). For
significant factor loadings provide example, for the variable satisfaction with the
support for convergent validity (Hair recruitment process mean values are 4.29 for
et al., 2008). no RPO, 4.04 for outsourcing job advertise-
Second, the measurement model can also ment and preselection, and 3.64 for outsourc-
be used to evaluate discriminant validity. ing job advertisement, preselection, and tele-
Constructs demonstrate discriminant validity phone interview. The highest degree of RPO
if the variance extracted for each construct is (scenario 4) has the lowest mean value of
higher than the squared correlation between 3.14. We found similar results for the depen-
them (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Fornell & Larcker, dent variable company attractiveness.
1981). We examined each construct of our Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-
model 2 and found that all of them have hoc tests (Tukey) for the mean differences in
composite reliabilities above the recom- satisfaction with the recruitment process show
mended value of .79 and the average variance that the negative effect of RPO is due to the
extracted by each construct is above .57. The differences between scenario 1 and scenario
literature recommends composite reliability 4. For the variable company attractiveness,
above .60 and average variance extracted by negative effects are due to the differences

TABLE I Correlations and Descriptive Statistics
Variable N M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Job-acceptance intention 158 4.84 1.01 (.84)
2. Company attractiveness 158 4.12 1.02 .67 (.90)
3. Satisfaction with the recruitment process 158 3.77 1.17 .38 .53 (.77)
4. Searching for a job 158 0.34 0.48 .13 .22 .24
5. Age 155 24.16 2.06 .11 .03 .01 .05
6. Gender 154 0.47 0.50 .03 .00 .09 .06 .16
7. Years of job experience 158 2.57 1.02 .04 .07 .04 .08 .43 .13
8. Number of remaining semesters 156 3.32 1.57 .03 .04 .02 .10 .45 .00 .18
9. Extent of RPO 158 2.49 1.13 .23 .35 .31 .23 .05 .01 .06 .06
Note: N = sample size; M = mean value; SD = standard deviation. Diagonal: Cronbach’s alpha in parentheses.
Correlations with absolute values above .16 are statistically significant at p < .05.
between scenario 1 and scenario 3 as well

as between scenario 1 and scenario 4. Conse- Company
Attractiveness
quently, an outsourcing of job advertisement H2: .19* H3: .26**
and preselection (scenario 2) seems to be as
appropriate as no outsourcing (scenario 1).
Job-
Thus, there is reason to believe that appli- Extent of Acceptance
RPO Intention
cants accept low levels of RPO, while higher
levels of RPO result in a negative effect on
applicants’ satisfaction with the recruitment H1: .31**
Satisfaction with
process and company attractiveness. the Recruitment
Process
In Figure 2 and Table II, the results of the
final hypothesized SEM are illustrated. The final FIGURE 2. Final Structural Equation Model
SEM has a satisfactory fit (χ2 32.29, d 32, Note: Illustrated are standardized estimates. Continuous lines
p-value .45) and the overall fit measures are indicate hypothesized direct effects (H1 and H2); dashed
lines indicate the hypothesized indirect effect (H3). This sim-
acceptable (CFI 1.00, TLI 1.00, plified version of the model does not show error terms or
RMSEA .01, SRMR .04). The indicator variables of the latent constructs.
results support our three hypoth- Model fit: x2 32.29, df 32, p .45; CFI 1.00, TLI 1.00,
This study provides esized relationships for the direct, RMSEA .01, SRMR .04.
*p .05; **p .01
indirect, and total effects depicted
support for a
in Table II. Extent of RPO is nega-
negative relationship tively related to the satisfaction
with the recruitment process (H1) as supports our assumption that the negative
between the well as to company attractiveness effect of extent of RPO on job-acceptance in-
(H2). Extent of RPO is also nega- tention is mediated by satisfaction with the
extent of RPO
tively related to job-acceptance in- recruitment process as well as company attrac-
and graduates’ tention, mediated by satisfaction tiveness. This finding is in line with previ-
with the recruitment process and ous research showing that the effects of
reactions. In company attractiveness (H3). procedural justice mechanisms on job-
In addition, Table II shows acceptance intention are mediated by or-
particular,
the direct effects of satisfaction ganizational attractiveness (Chapman &
delegating parts with the recruitment process on com- Webster, 2006).
pany attractiveness and company We additionally estimated three linear
of the recruitment attractiveness on job-acceptance in- regression analyses depicted in Table III be-
tention. Both are in line with pre- cause it is uncommon to insert control vari-
process to an vious findings by Chapman et al. ables into SEM. Models A1, B1, and C1 only
external provider (2005). Since we adapted the contain the controls; models A2, B2, and C2
measures for company attractive- also include the hypothesized direct effects.
negatively affects ness and job-acceptance intention None of the controls has a direct effect on the
from Highhouse et al. (2003), the three dependent variables satisfaction with
graduates’ high effect size for this relation- the recruitment process, company attractiveness,
ship is not surprising. The au- and job-acceptance intention, except the vari-
satisfaction with the
thors found a standardized able searching for a job. The results of the lin-
recruitment process parameter estimate of .82 in their ear regression models A2, B2, and C2 are in
study. Furthermore, Table II line with the results of the SEM and support
and a company’s shows the two specific indirect our hypotheses. Extent of RPO has negative
effects of extent of RPO on job- direct effects on the satisfaction with the re-
attractiveness.
acceptance intention: (1) a negative cruitment process and company attractiveness,
indirect effect via satisfaction with but there is no significant direct effect of ex-
the recruitment process and com- tent of RPO or the satisfaction with the recruit-
pany attractiveness and (2) a negative indirect ment process on job-acceptance intention in
effect only via company attractiveness. This model C2, which supports our mediation

TABLE II Estimated Coefficients for Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects in SEMa
Effects Hypothesized Relationship B SE B Z p-Value
Direct effects
(H1) Extent of RPO S Satisfaction with the recruitment .21 .07 .31 3.27 .00
process
(H2) Extent of RPO S Company attractiveness .15 .06 .19 2.53 .01
Satisfaction with the recruitment S Company attractiveness .59 .12 .51 4.85 .00
process
Company attractiveness S Job-acceptance intention .79 .09 .76 8.51 .00
Indirect effectsb
Via satisfaction with the
recruitment process
Extent of RPO S Job-acceptance intention .10 .04 .12 2.85 .00
Via company attractiveness
Extent of RPO S Job-acceptance intention .12 .05 .14 2.39 .02
b
Total effect
(H3) Extent of RPO S Job-acceptance intention .22 .06 .26 3.81 .00
a
B = unstandardized estimator; SE = standard error; Z = Z-values; b = standardized estimator.
b
Bias-corrected standard errors; number of bootstrap samples = 2,000.
hypothesis. In summary, the results did not deliver their recruitment process to a third-
change in the additional regression analyses party company, the personal contact between
with controls. the applicants and the desired employer di-
minishes. Based on critical contact theory
and signal theory, we argued that applicants
Discussion
negatively react to such a decrease in personal
This study provides support for a negative contact and inconsistency in administration.
relationship between the extent of RPO and In fact, our results show that applicants are
graduates’ reactions. In particular, delegating less satisfied with recruitment process and
parts of the recruitment process to an exter- perceive the potential employer or job as less
nal provider negatively affects graduates’ sat- favorable. We suggest that the more parts of
isfaction with the recruitment process and a the company’s recruitment process are deliv-
company’s attractiveness. Furthermore, the ered to an external provider, the less an ap-
extent of RPO is negatively related to job- plicant gets a subjective feel of being es-
acceptance intention, mediated by satisfac- teemed appropriately (cf. Gerstner, 1966).
tion with the recruitment process and com- Moreover, applicants could doubt the privacy
pany attractiveness. Demographic and of information, since personal information
personal variables were included as controls will be provided to an external provider in-
in supplementary regression analyses. Thus, stead of the desired employer. As a result, it is
interpretations that refer to these factors as conceivable that top graduates prematurely
third variables can be ruled out. withdraw from the recruitment process or
Our study provides new insights on the even refuse a job offer. Thus, negative appli-
link between contextual factors of the re- cant reactions also have negative conse-
cruitment process and applicants’ reactions. quences for the organization, which is in
While the majority of research focused on contradiction to the expected benefits of
personal treatments during the selection RPO.
process (e.g., interviewer friendliness, inter- The results of the descriptive statistics
viewer competencies) and their influence on indicate that especially higher levels of RPO
applicants’ reactions (Chapman et al., 2005; (i.e., outsourcing of the telephone and/or
Chapman & Webster, 2006; Hausknecht et al., one-to-one interview) affect graduates’ reac-
2004), the present study shows that formal tions more negatively than lower levels of
procedural characteristics (e.g., who conducts RPO (i.e., advertising and/or preselection). In
the recruitment process) influence applicants’ the case of lower levels of RPO, graduates’
reactions as well. At first glance, our findings satisfaction with the recruitment process is
might be surprising. For example, in their almost equal to scenarios where the potential
meta-analysis, Chapman et al. (2005) stated employer does no outsourcing. Thus, to some
that “how the recruiting is conducted (i.e., extent, RPO seems to be acceptable for gradu-
critical contact; Behling et al., 1968) is [. . .] ates. If organizations only deliver those
important; however, who does the recruiting recruitment activities to external providers
appears not to be important” (p. 938). Our that are acceptable for applicants, organiza-
findings suggest that this statement needs tions are able to profit from cost and quality
some clarification, as we show that who does advantages without the risk of sending nega-
the recruiting (external provider vs. potential tive signals.
employer) obviously makes a difference. That aside, we assume that two factors
Notwithstanding the insights of previous may partially compensate the negative effects
work on the potential benefits and pitfalls of of RPO—the perceived professionalism of the
outsourcing the recruitment and selection external provider and/or the image (or reputa-
(Belcourt, 2006; Byham & Riddle, 1999; tion) of the desired employer. First, if an ex-
Lawler et al., 2004), our study sheds light on ternal provider is perceived to be highly expe-
another potential disadvantage, that is, nega- rienced in handling applications or doing
tive applicant reactions. If organizations selection procedures, the negative effects of

TABLE III Results of OLS Analyses
Dependent: Satisfaction with the Dependent: Company Dependent: Job-Acceptance
Recruitment Process Attractiveness Intention
Variables Model A1 Model A2 Model B1 Model B2 Model C1 Model C2
Searching for a job .67** (.19) .52** (.19) .46** (.17) .06 (.15) .35* (.17) .04 (.14)
Age .06 (.06) .06 (.06) .02 (.06) –.01 (.05) .05 (.05) .04 (.04)
Gender –.23 (.19) –.24 (.18) –.02 (.17) .06 (.14) –.01 (.17) .01 (.13)
Years of job experience –.09 (.10) –.08 (.10) –.11 (.09) –.07 (.08) –.14 (.09) –.07 (.07)
Number of remaining semesters .04 (.07) .05 (.06) –.01 (.06) –.02 (.05) .01 (.06) .02 (.04)
Extent of RPO –.26** (.08) –.22** (.06) –.00 (.06)
Satisfaction with the recruitment .42** (.06) .01 (.07)
process
Company attractiveness .65** (.07)
2
R .09 .15 .06 .37 .05 .47
2
Adjusted R .06 .12 .03 .34 .01 .44
F 2.93* 10.45** 1.83 34.76** 1.42 38.33**
Note: Unstandardized estimators are given, with standard errors in parentheses. An absolute term (constant) was estimated for each regression but omitted due to readability. n = 154.
*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01.
RPO could decrease. Second, graduates even- differently, job-offering companies should
tually do not mind RPO if the desired em- ensure that applicants do not perceive the
ployer has a positive image or reputation activities of an external provider. Alterna-
within society. In these cases, graduates may tively, client companies should ensure that
accept inconsistencies during the initial con- the applicants perceive the external provider
tact in order to get the job at a company that as qualified and professional.
is perceived mostly favorably. Nevertheless,
we suppose that the vast majority of external
Limitations
providers for HR recruitment services within
a national market are rather small and barely The current study is not without limitations.
known to graduates, except a small number First, the results have to be seen in the context
of famous, well-known companies. We also of the use of scenarios. Scenario-based studies
suppose that the vast majority of employers tend to report higher relationships than field
within a national market are barely known to studies (Hausknecht et al., 2004). However, a
graduates, except a small number of famous, scenario-based study reveals the same rela-
well-known companies. Even though almost tionships between predictors and dependent
all companies have their own website, informa- variables as a field study (Hausknecht et al.,
tion asymmetry still exists between graduates 2004).
and potential employers. Therefore, negative Additionally, if participants are con-
effects of RPO due to signal mechanisms and fronted with hypothetical situations that are
critical contact elements cannot be ruled out. sufficiently realistic, it is appropriate to as-
Future research should clarify whether gradu- sume that simulations (i.e., scenarios) are in-
ates’ perception of an external provider’s ternal valid methods for theory testing
professionalism or an employer’s image can (Maute & Dubé, 1999; Schmitt et al., 1992). It
partially compensate for the negative effects is in the nature of experimental designs that
of RPO. only a limited number of variations can be
introduced. To ensure equal settings in terms
of quality and performance of the recruit-
Managerial Implications
ment process for the four scenarios, we used
Despite the advantages of outsourcing re- exactly the same wording in every scenario,
cruitment and selection (Byham & Riddle, except for the differences of the names for
1999), our results show that a company the respective organization (i.e., Liebermann
should consider possible negative effects of Ltd. and Personnel Ltd.). To ensure a realistic
RPO on applicants’ perception of the recruit- setup in our scenarios, we tested the clarity of
ment process, the company, and the job. Al- each scenario and we took the advice and
though RPO seems to be acceptable to some considerations of HR experts into account.
extent (i.e., outsourcing of job advertisement Second, our study builds upon the as-
and preselection), the worst case would be sumption that applicants perceive the extent
that talented and highly qualified graduates of RPO during the recruitment process. Al-
prematurely break off the recruitment pro- though we extensively reviewed previous re-
cess or do not even apply for a job vacancy search on outsourcing of recruitment and se-
because they do not perceive a real interest of lection, specific information on how
the employer. Further, these applicants may organizations conduct RPO is still missing.
not recommend the company as an attractive Therefore, we mainly took the advice of HR
employer to other people (Smither et al., experts into account when we developed our
1993). Otherwise, if companies consider four scenarios. Based on their experience,
graduates’ negative perception of RPO, they outsourcing of recruitment and selection is
can react in advance. In fact, many external apparent to applicants. Thus, applicants
providers for HR recruitment and selection pro- know who is an employee of the external
cedures will ensure that applicants do not per- provider and who is not. In addition, given
ceive them as a third-party company. Or put the widespread usage of RPO around the

world (KellyOCG & HROA, 2010; Ordanini & activity, the results of our study provide sev-
Silvestri, 2008), it seems to be fruitful to ex- eral avenues for future research on applicant
amine the effects of RPO on applicant reac- reactions and RPO. First, future research
tions even if not all client companies make should clarify how organizations actually use
RPO apparent to their applicants. and implement RPO and should examine the
Third, our study consists of a student extent to which organizations reveal that
sample. Thus, one might be concerned about parts of the recruitment process are delivered
the degree to which our results can be gener- to an external provider. For instance, we do
alized to nonstudent samples like the actual not exactly know how organizations out-
working population. However, Highhouse source their recruitment and selection. What
and Gillespie (2009) emphasized that the are the financial or contractual arrangements
theory should apply to the sample. Since our in an outsourcing relationship? Is the posi-
theoretical framework (i.e., critical contact tioning of an RPO relationship a part of the
and signal theory) applies to all kinds of ap- contractual arrangements? Regarding the im-
plicants, we think that our results are valid at portance of attracting and selecting well-
least for graduates or young professionals. educated graduates, there is a need to further
Virtually all of our participants have applied examine whether client compa-
for jobs before and were close to the end of nies achieve the expected benefits
Given the
their studies. Thus, the topic of a recruitment of an RPO relationship (e.g., in-
and selection process is highly relevant for all creasing the quality, decreasing the widespread usage
of our participants. But we are cautious to costs per hire/time to hire) or not.
generalize the results to employees with more Second, future research should of RPO around the
years of working experience or managerial examine whether the image of an
positions with high responsibility, since these organization, the professionalism world, it seems
factors may interact with the variables or re- of an external provider, and/or to be fruitful to
lationships of our study (Highhouse & job characteristics change the re-
Gillespie, 2009). sults we have found. For example, examine the effects
Fourth, one might be concerned that does RPO matter for graduates’
both companies, the external provider and reaction if the client company is of RPO on applicant
the company Liebermann Ltd., are fictive one of the most favorable employ-
reactions even if not
firms without image, prestige, or competen- ers? How do graduates react to
cies. The image or competency of a company RPO if the potential employer is all client companies
or an external provider could influence our unknown but the external pro-
results. As mentioned earlier, a positive per- vider is one of the best-known make RPO apparent
ception of the professionalism of the external service providers? It is also con-
to their applicants.
provider or the image of the employer may ceivable that the desired job or
partially compensate the negative effects of the desired position is more im-
RPO on the overall satisfaction with the re- portant for applicants. Does RPO
cruitment process. However, we do not sup- have an influence on applicant reactions in
pose that professionalism or image will invert these cases? This seems to be a fruitful re-
the negative effects of RPO into positive ef- search stream in order to clarify whether
fects. It is more likely that negative influ- professionalism, public image, or job charac-
ences of RPO do not occur if applicants have teristics have a direct or moderating influ-
a presumption about the competencies of the ence on applicant reactions to RPO.
external provider or the image of the poten- Third, the vast majority of previous re-
tial employer. search has examined HR outsourcing in gen-
eral, thereby focusing on outsourcing of all
HR activities at once (e.g., Cooke et al., 2005;
Future Research
Klaas et al., 1999, 2001; Shen, 2005). Only a
Given the importance of recruitment for or- few studies have focused on the outsourcing
ganizations as well as outsourcing of this HR decision of a single HR practice—for example,

training and development (e.g., Gainey & there is a need to focus on an outsourcing of
Klaas, 2003) or recruitment and selection (e.g., a single HR practice (e.g., pay and benefits,
Dasborough & Sue-Chan, 2002; Ordanini & performance appraisal, or electronic HRM) in
Silvestri, 2008). In line with Ordanini order to further elaborate potential conse-
and Silvestri (2008), our study shows that quences, risks, and benefits for organizations.
MARIUS CLAUS WEHNER is a lecturer and research associate in the Faculty of Econom-
ics and Business Administration at the University of Giessen in Germany. His current
research interests include HR outsourcing, international comparative and cross-cultural
HRM, and the HR business partner.
ANGELO GIARDINI is a lecturer in the Faculty of Economics and Business Administra-

tion at the University of Giessen in Germany. He received his PhD from the University
of Giessen. His current research interests include the HR outsourcing of recruitment and
selection procedures and international comparative HRM.
RÜDIGER KABST is a professor of human resource management, small and medium-

sized enterprises, and entrepreneurship in the Faculty of Economics and Business Admin-
istration at the University of Giessen in Germany. He received his PhD from the University
of Paderborn in Germany. His current research interests include international compara-
tive HRM, HR outsourcing, interim management, employer branding, interfirm coopera-
tions, entrepreneurship, and the internationalization of medium-sized enterprises.
References Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of struc-

tural equation models. Journal of the Academy of
Allen, D. G., Mahto, R. V., & Otondo, R. F. (2007). Web- Marketing Science, 16, 74–94.
based recruitment: Effects of information, organi-
zational brand, and attitudes toward a web site on Barber, A. E. (1998). Recruiting employees. Thousand
applicant attraction. Journal of Applied Psychology, Oaks, CA: Sage.
92, 1696–1708. Behling, O., Labovitz, G., & Gainer, M. (1968). College
Allen, D. G., Van Scotter, J. R., & Otondo, R. F. (2004). recruiting: A theoretical base. Personnel Journal,
Recruitment communication media: Impact on pre- 47(1), 13–19.
hire outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 57, 143–171. Belcourt, M. (2006). Outsourcing—The benefits and
Allison, P. (1999). Multiple regression: A primer. Thou- risks. Human Resource Management Review, 16,
sand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge. 269–279.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in struc-
equation modeling in practice: A review and tural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
recommended two-step approach. Psychological Berkowitz, J. (2005). The birth of the RPO alliance. HRO
Bulletin, 103, 411–423. Today, 4(6). Retrieved from http://www.hrotoday
Ang, S., & Cummings, L. L. (1997). Strategic response .com/content/991/birth-rpo-alliance
to institutional influences on information systems Berthon, P., Ewing, M., & Hah, L. L. (2005). Captivating
outsourcing. Organization Science, 8, 235–256. company: Dimensions of attractiveness in employer
Aubert, B. A., Rivard, S., & Patry, M. (1996). A transac- branding. International Journal of Advertising, 24,
tion cost approach to outsourcing behavior: Some 151–172.
empirical evidence. Information & Management, Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent
30(2), 51–64. variables. New York, NY: Wiley.

Brown, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of Greece. International Journal of Manpower, 26,
assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long 382–396.
(Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp.
Gatewood, R. D., Gowan, M. A., & Lautenschlager,
136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
G. J. (1993). Corporate image, recruitment image,
Budhwar, P. S., Luthar, H. K., & Bhatnagar, J. (2006). and initial job choice decisions. Academy of Man-
The dynamics of HRM systems in Indian BPO firms. agement Journal, 36, 414–427.
Journal of Labor Research, 27, 339–360.
Gerstner, L. V. (1966). College recruiting: Why the good
Byham, W. C., & Riddle, S. (1999). Outsourcing: a ones get away. Management Review, 55(3), 4–16.
strategic tool for a more strategic HR. Employment
Giardini, A., & Kabst, R. (2008). Recruitment Process
Relations Today, 26(1), 37–55.
Outsourcing: Eine Szenariostudie zur Akzeptanz
Calder, B. T., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1981). von Outsourcing-Maßnahmen in der Person-
Designing research for application. Journal of Con- alauswahl. [Recruitment process outsourcing: A
sumer Research, 8, 197–207. scenario-study about the acceptance of outsourc-
Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasen- ing-practices in personnel selection]. Zeitschrift für
tin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction Personalforschung, 22, 370–387.
to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic Gilley, K. M., Greer, C. R., & Rasheed, A. A. (2004).
review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Human resource outsourcing and organizational
Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 928–944. performance in manufacturing firms. Journal of
Chapman, D. S., & Webster, J. (2006). Toward an inte- Business Research, 57, 232–240.
grated model of applicant reactions and job choice. Greer, C. R., Youngblood, S. A., & Gray, D. A. (1999).
International Journal of Human Resource Manage- Human resource management outsourcing: The
ment, 17, 1032–1057. make or buy decision. Academy of Management
Collins, C. J. (2007). The interactive effects of recruit- Executive, 13(3), 85–96.
ment practices and product awareness on job seek- Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E.
ers’ employer knowledge and application behav- (2008). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper
iors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 180–190. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Collins, C. J., & Stevens, C. K. (2002). The relationship Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004).
between early recruitment-related activities and the Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An up-
application decisions of new labor-market entrants: dated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychol-
A brand equity approach to recruitment. Journal of ogy, 57, 639–683.
Applied Psychology, 87, 1121–1133.
Highhouse, S. (2009). Designing experiments that
Conklin, D. W. (2005). Risks and rewards in HR busi- generalize. Organizational Research Methods, 12,
ness process outsourcing. Long Range Planning, 554–566.
38, 579–598.
Highhouse, S., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2009). Do samples
Cooke, F. L., Shen, J., & McBride, A. (2005). Outsourc- really matter that much? In C. E. Lance & R. J. Van-
ing HR as a competitive strategy? A literature denberg (Eds.), Statistical and methodology myths
review and an assessment of implications. Human and urban legends: Doctrine, Verity and fable in the
Resource Management, 44, 413–432. organizational and social sciences (pp. 247–265).
Dasborough, M., & Sue-Chan, C. (2002). The role of New York, NY: Routledge.
transaction costs and institutional forces in the Highhouse, S., Lievens, F., & Sinar, E. F. (2003). Mea-
outsourcing of recruitment. Asia Pacific Journal of suring attraction to organizations. Educational and
Human Resources, 40, 306–321. Psychological Measurement, 63, 986–1001.
Delmotte, J., & Sels, L. (2008). HR outsourcing: threat Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit.
or opportunity? Personnel Review, 37, 543–563. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Model-
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation ing: Concepts, Issues and Applications (pp. 77–99).
models with unobservable variables and measure- Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ment error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covari-
Gainey, T. W., & Klaas, B. S. (2003). The outsourcing of ance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underpa-
training and development: Factors impacting client rameterized model misspecification. Psychological
satisfaction. Journal of Management, 29, 207–229. Methods, 3, 424–453.
Galanaki, E., & Papalexandris, N. (2005). Outsourc- Hülsheger, U. R., & Anderson, N. (2009). Applicant
ing of human resource management services in perspectives in selection: Going beyond preference

reactions. International Journal of Selection and theory perspective. Educational Administration

Assessment, 17, 335–345. Quarterly, 37(1), 27–57.
Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involve- Powell, G. N. (1984). Effects of job attributes and
ment on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychologi- recruiting practices on applicant decisions: A com-
cal Bulletin, 106, 290–314. parision. Personnel Psychology, 37, 721–732.
Kelly Outsourcing and Consulting Group & Human Powell, G. N., & Goulet, L. R. (1996). Recruiters’ and
Resources Outsourcing Association (KellyOCG & applicants’ reactions to campus interviews and
HROA). (2010). Global RPO Report 2010. Retrieved employment decisions. Academy of Management
from http://www.kellyocg.com Journal, 39, 1619–1640.
Kessler, I., Coyle-Shapiro, J., & Purcell, J. (1999). Out- Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2000). Applicants’ per-
sourcing and the employee perspective. Human ceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A
Resource Management Journal, 9(2), 5–19. critical review and agenda for the future. Journal of
Klaas, B. S., McClendon, J. A., & Gainey, T. W. (1999). Management, 26, 565–606.
HR outsourcing and its impact: The role of transac- Rynes, S. L., & Barber, A. E. (1990). Applicant attraction
tion costs. Personnel Psychology, 52, 113–136. strategies: An organizational perspective. Academy
Klaas, B. S., McClendon, J. A., & Gainey, T. W. (2001). of Management Review, 15, 286–310.
Outsourcing HR: The impact of organizational charac- Rynes, S. L., & Boudreau, J. W. (1986). College recruit-
teristics. Human Resource Management, 40, 125–138. ing in large organizations: Practice, evaluation, and
Lawler, E. E., Ulrich, D., Fitz-enz, J., Madden, J. C., & research implications. Personnel Psychology, 39,
Maruca, R. F. (2004). Human resources business 729–757.
process outsourcing: Transforming how HR gets its
Rynes, S. L., Bretz, R. D., & Gerhardt, B. (1991). The
work done (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
importance of recruitment in job choice: A different
Lever, S. (1997). An analysis of managerial motiva- way of looking. Personnel Psychology, 44, 487–521.
tions behind outsourcing practices in human
Rynes, S. L., Heneman, H. G., & Schwab, D. P. (1980).
resources. Human Resource Planning, 20(2), 37–47.
Individual reactions to organizational recruiting: A
Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G., & Anseel, F. (2007). Organi- review. Personnel Psychology, 33, 529–542.
zational identity and employer image: Towards a
Schmitt, B. H., Dubé, L., & Leclerc, F. (1992). Intrusions
unifying framework. British Journal of Manage-
into waiting lines: Does the queue constitute a
ment, 18(March Supplement), 45–59.
social system? Journal of Personality and Social
Maute, M. F., & Dubé, L. (1999). Patterns of emotional Psychology, 63, 806–815.
responses and behavioural consequences of dis-
Schreurs, B., Derous, E., Proos, K., Notelaers, G., &
satisfaction. Applied Psychology: An International
De Witte, K. (2008). Applicant selection expecta-
Review, 48, 349–366.
tions: Validating a multidimensional measure in
Michaels, E., Handfield-Jones, H., & Axelrod, B. (2001). the military. International Journal of Selection and
The war for talent. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Assessment, 16, 170–176.
School Press.
Schwab, D. P., Rynes, S. L., & Aldag, R. J. (1987). Theo-
Ordanini, A., & Silvestri, G. (2008). Recruitment and ries and research on job search and choice. In K. M.
selection services: Efficiency and competitive rea- Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in person-
sons in the outsourcing of HR practices. Interna- nel and human resource management (Vol. 5, pp.
tional Journal of Human Resource Management, 129–166). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
19, 372–391.
Shen, J. (2005). Human resource outsourcing: 1990–
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement 2004. Journal of Organisational Transformation and
can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing Social Change, 2, 275–296.
message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915–1926. Smither, J. W., Reilly, R. R., Millsap, R. E., Pearlman, K.,
& Stoffey, R. W. (1993). Applicant reactions to selec-
Ployhart, R. E., & Ryan, A. M. (1998). Applicants’
tion procedures. Personnel Psychology, 46, 49–75.
reactions to the fairness of selection procedures:
The effects of positive rule violations and time Stevens, C. K. (1997). Effects of preinterview beliefs on
of measurement. Journal of Applied Psychology, applicants’ reactions to campus interviews. Acad-
83(1), 3–16. emy of Management Journal, 40, 947–966.
Pounder, D. G., & Merrill, R. J. (2001). Job desirabil- Syedain, H. (2008). Up, up and away. People Manage-
ity of the high school principalship: A job choice ment, 14(23), 4–8.

Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer organization. Academy of Management Proceed-
choice. Marketing Science, 4, 199–214. ings, pp. 282–286.
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1992). Influences
for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psy- of campus recruiting on applicant attraction to
chometrika, 38(1), 1–10. firms. Academy of Management Journal, 35,
Turban, D. B. (2001). Organizational attractiveness as 739–765.
an employer on college campuses: An examination
Turban, D. B., Forret, M. L., & Hendrickson, C. L. (1998).
of the applicant population. Journal of Vocational
Applicant attraction to firms: Influences of organi-
Behavior, 58, 293–312.
zation reputation, job and organizational attributes,
Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1991). Influences of and recruiter behaviors. Journal of Vocational
the campus interview on applicant attraction to the Behavior, 52, 24–44.

APPENDIX A
Hypothetical Scenario 1 (Example: lowest degree of RPO/no RPO)

At first, please read the following scenario carefully. Then try to put yourself in the position
of the scenario as well as possible. Afterwards, please answer the questions as if you had been
in that situation.
You have seen that the Liebermann Ltd. has posted a job that exactly matches your abilities
and expectations. Therefore you decide to apply for this job.
The company requests you to send your job application to the following e-mail address:
recruiting@liebermann.com. Three days after sending your job application, you receive an e-mail
with an arrival notice from the Liebermann Ltd.:
From: recruiting@liebermann.com
To: XXX
Subject: Job application for position “xyz”
Date: xyz
Dear Mr. / Mrs. XXX,
Thank you for your application and therefore showing your trust and interest in working
for our company.
Your application will be examined in detail. Therefore, we ask for your patience.
We will contact you as soon as possible.
Best regards
Liebermann Ltd.
Two weeks later, you receive a call from Liebermann Ltd. You agree on a date for a telephone
interview with the personnel consultant of Liebermann Ltd. During this telephone interview, he
asks questions referring to your CV and your motivation for applying for this job.
One week later, you receive another call from Liebermann Ltd. You are told that all tele-
phone interviews of potential job applicants have been evaluated and that you have been
placed on the short list. An employee invites you to a job interview that will take place in the
headquarters of Liebermann Ltd.
On the following Wednesday, you drive to Liebermann Ltd.’s headquarters. As soon as you
arrive, you are welcomed by an employee of Liebermann Ltd. and the responsible line-of-busi-
ness executive of Liebermann Ltd.
The employee explains the process of the job interview. Afterwards, he gives you informa-
tion about Liebermann Ltd. and comments on details of the vacant job. You are asked why you
think that you are suitable for the position. Furthermore, they ask for your weaknesses and
strengths. The line-of-business executive of Liebermann Ltd. describes the team that you will
be working with as well as your future tasks. Afterwards, you are asked questions about your
expertise and you have the possibility to ask questions as well.
One hour later, the job interview is finished. The employee of Liebermann Ltd. says goodbye
and walks you to the door.
On your way home, you think about whether you could imagine working for Liebermann
Ltd. You also reflect on all your impressions of the company.

Hypothetical Scenario 4 (Example: highest degree of RPO)

At first, please read the following scenario carefully. Then try to put yourself in the position
of the scenario as well as possible. Afterwards, please answer the questions as if you had been
in that situation.
You have seen that the Liebermann Ltd. has posted a job that exactly matches your abilities
and expectations. Therefore you decide to apply for this job.
The company requests you to send your job application to the following e-mail address:
recruiting@personnel.com. At the end of the advertisement you read “Please send your job ap-
plication to the Personnel Ltd., our recruitment partner.”
Three days after sending your job application, you receive an e-mail with an arrival notice
from the Personnel Ltd.:
From: recruiting@personnel.com
To: XXX
Subject: Job application for position “xyz”
Date: xyz
Dear Mr. / Mrs. XXX,
Thank you for your application and therefore showing your trust and interest in working for
Liebermann Ltd. Our service provider Personnel Ltd. is specialized in recruitment and selection
and supports the Liebermann Ltd. in filling jobs.
Your application will be examined in detail. Therefore, we ask for your patience.
We will contact you as soon as possible.
Best regards
Personnel Ltd.
Two weeks later, you receive a call from Personnel Ltd. You agree on a date for a telephone
interview with the personnel consultant of Personnel Ltd. During this telephone interview, he
asks questions referring to your CV and your motivation for applying for this job.
One week later, you receive another call from Personnel Ltd. You are told that all telephone
interviews of potential job applicants have been evaluated and that you have been placed
on the short list. In the name of Liebermann Ltd., an employee invites you to a job interview,
which will take place in the headquarters of Liebermann Ltd.
On the following Wednesday, you drive to Liebermann Ltd.’s headquarters. As soon as you
arrive, you are welcomed by an employee of Personnel Ltd. and the responsible line-of-business
executive of Liebermann Ltd.
The employee of Personnel Ltd. explains the process of the job interview. Afterwards, he
gives you information on Liebermann Ltd. and comments on details of the vacant job. You are
asked why you think that you are suitable for the position. Furthermore, they ask for your
weaknesses and strengths. The line-of-business executive of Liebermann Ltd. describes the team
that you will be working with as well as your future tasks. Afterwards, you are asked questions
about your expertise and you have the possibility to ask questions as well.
One hour later, the job interview is finished. The employee of Personnel Ltd. says goodbye
and walks you to the door.
On your way home, you think about whether you could imagine working for Liebermann
Ltd. You also reflect on all your impressions of the company.

Human Resource Management - 2012 - Claus Wehner - Graduates reactions to recruitment process outsourcing A scenario‐based

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Resource Management - 2012 - Claus Wehner - Graduates reactions to recruitment process outsourcing A scenario‐based

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GRADUATES’ REACTIONS

This study examines how successive outsourcing of recruitment activities

Keywords: outsourcing, recruitment, selection, applicant reaction

Introduction (e.g., Gatewood, Gowan, & Lautenschlager,

A well-educated applicants is an im-

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

academic research. While some studies fo-

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

of the client on a permanent basis (Byham & Theory and Hypotheses

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Ltd.,” “Personnel Ltd.,” and “I don’t know.” Controls

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

between scenario 1 and scenario 3 as well

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

ANGELO GIARDINI is a lecturer in the Faculty of Economics and Business Administra-

RÜDIGER KABST is a professor of human resource management, small and medium-

References Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of struc-

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

reactions. International Journal of Selection and theory perspective. Educational Administration

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Hypothetical Scenario 1 (Example: lowest degree of RPO/no RPO)

Dear Mr. / Mrs. XXX,

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Hypothetical Scenario 4 (Example: highest degree of RPO)

Dear Mr. / Mrs. XXX,

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

You might also like