Keeping Your Headcount When All About You Are Losing Theirs: Downsizing, Voluntary Turnover Rates, and The Moderating Role of HR Practices

Trevor, Charlie O.; Nyberg, Anthony J.

doi:10.5465/amj.2008.31767250

Cited by 287 publications

(268 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

256

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The turnover behavior of post-layoff hires also begins to reframe concerns over layoffs. Various authors have reported that the organizational performance consequences of downsizing are mixed (e.g., Cappelli, 2000;Madrick, 1995 (Trevor & Nyberg, 2008). Hence, while laying off employees provides a short-term cost reduction for the organization, this tactic may at the same time be contributing to turnover both within the company and economy-wide.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Trevor and Nyberg (2008) reported positive effects of downsizing on the likelihood that layoff survivors subsequently voluntarily exit the offending organization. Although surviving employees are spared the direct negative effects of the layoff (i.e., unemployment and stigmatization), the psychological consequences that we expect for layoff victims should still apply (e.g., surviving employees worry about future job security and experience loss of trust in the employer; Brockner, Grover, Reed, & DeWitt, 1992;Cascio, 1993).…”

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shocks are jarring events that lead employees to make judgments about their jobs. Research on the unfolding model of turnover has shown that a layoff is a shock to the system that launches psychological decision processes associated with quit behaviors among layoff survivors (T. W. Lee et al, 1996;Trevor & Nyberg, 2008). While the implications of layoffs-as-shocks have yet to be addressed among layoff victims, the literature surrounding the unfolding model suggests that victims' evaluations of the post-layoff Individual Layoff History and Voluntary Turnover !…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Creating a more quit-friendly national workforce? Individual layoff history and voluntary turnover.

Davis¹,

Trevor²,

Feng³

2015

Journal of Applied Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While Bureau of Labor Statistics data reveal that U.S. employers laid off over 33 million employees since 1994, virtually no research has addressed the behavior of layoff victims upon reemployment. In a first step, we investigate how layoffs shape voluntary turnover behavior in subsequent jobs. Utilizing a recently developed fixed effects specification of survival analysis, we find that a layoff history is positively associated with quit behavior. This effect is partially mediated by underemployment and job satisfaction in the post-layoff job. The remaining indirect effect is consistent with the notion that layoffs produce a psychological spillover to postlayoff employment, which then manifests in quit behavior.We also find that layoff effects on turnover attenuate as an individual's layoffs accumulate and vary in magnitude according to the turnover "path" followed by the leaver. While Bureau of Labor Statistics data reveal that U.S. employers laid off over 33 million employees since 1994, virtually no research has addressed the behavior of layoff victims upon reemployment. In a first step, we investigate how layoffs shape voluntary turnover behavior in subsequent jobs. Utilizing a recently developed fixed effects specification of survival analysis, we find that a layoff history is positively associated with quit behavior. This effect is partially mediated by underemployment and job satisfaction in the post-layoff job. The remaining indirect effect is consistent with the notion that layoffs produce a psychological spillover to post-layoff employment, which then manifests in quit behavior. We also find that layoff effects on turnover attenuate as an individual's layoffs accumulate and vary in magnitude according to the turnover "path" followed by the leaver.Individual Layoff History and Voluntary Turnover ! 3Creating a More Quit-Friendly National Workforce? Individual Layoff History and Voluntary TurnoverOne of the standard mechanisms through which today's companies attempt to cope with competitive pressures is through downsizing (Cascio, 1993). The extent to and manner in which downsizing contributes to subsequent organizational performance is a complex issue, with scholars offering explanations for both positive (e.g., Love & Nohria, 2005) and negative downsizing effects (e.g., Trevor & Nyberg, 2008). What there is no dispute about, however, is the prevalence of downsizing in the U.S.-the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports over 30 million layoffs between 1994 and 2010, a figure that does not include small-scale layoffs (i.e., those displacing fewer than 50 employees). While layoffs are more numerous when firms are struggling economically (Cascio, 1993), company financial health, employee tenure, job performance, and industry all fail to protect American employees from the layoff axe (Cascio, 2002).Often lost in the analysis of layoffs and their effects on the companies that initiate them is that a majority of layoff victims ultimately find new jobs. In the aggregate, these millions of victims therefore ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Creating a more quit-friendly national workforce? Individual layoff history and voluntary turnover.

Davis¹,

Trevor²,

Feng³

2015

Journal of Applied Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although researchers often view training as an inducement and investment that should reduce turnover (e.g., Huselid, 1995), others have argued, on the basis of human capital theory (Becker, 1962), that investments in training-particularly those that are general versus firm specific-may actually increase turnover (Benson, Finegold, & Mohrman, 2004;Haines et al, 2010). That is, while training investments may be viewed generally as a signal of longer term organizational commitment to employees, to the extent that training increases external marketability (e.g., Trevor & Nyberg, 2008) or an individual's movement capital (Trevor, 2001), higher turnover is likely. Given arguments that general training is more visible externally, it is expected to relate positively to turnover.…”

Section: Moderators Of Antecedent-turnover Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Topical interest further formalized via several influential accounts of collective turnover's causes and consequences (March & Simon, 1958;Mobley, 1982;Price, 1977;Staw, 1980). More recently, this attention has intensified in terms of empirical studies (e.g., Batt & Colvin, 2011;Shaw, Dineen, Fang, & Vellella, 2009;Siebert & Zubanov, 2009;Trevor & Nyberg, 2008), theoretical contributions (Dess & Shaw, 2001), and narrative reviews (Hausknecht & Trevor, 2011;Shaw, 2011). Indeed, over 100 studies have been published on the topic-nearly two thirds in the last decade alone-mostly in leading journals in management and related fields (Hausknecht & Trevor, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Causes and consequences of collective turnover: A meta-analytic review.

Heavey¹,

Holwerda²,

Hausknecht³

2013

Journal of Applied Psychology

265

320

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given growing interest in collective turnover (i.e., employee turnover at unit and organizational levels), the authors propose an organizing framework for its antecedents and consequences and test it using metaanalysis. Based on analysis of 694 effect sizes drawn from 82 studies, results generally support expected relationships across the 6 categories of collective turnover antecedents, with somewhat stronger and more consistent results for 2 categories: human resource management inducements/investments and job embeddedness signals. Turnover was negatively related to numerous performance outcomes, more strongly so for proximal rather than distal outcomes. Several theoretically grounded moderators help to explain average effect-size heterogeneity for both antecedents and consequences of turnover. Relationships generally did not vary according to turnover type (e.g., total or voluntary), although the relative absence of collective-level involuntary turnover studies is noted and remains an important avenue for future research. Given growing interest in collective turnover (i.e., employee turnover at unit and organizational levels), the authors propose an organizing framework for its antecedents and consequences and test it using meta-analysis. Based on analysis of 694 effect sizes drawn from 82 studies, results generally support expected relationships across the 6 categories of collective turnover antecedents, with somewhat stronger and more consistent results for 2 categories: human resource management inducements/investments and job embeddedness signals. Turnover was negatively related to numerous performance outcomes, more strongly so for proximal rather than distal outcomes. Several theoretically grounded moderators help to explain average effectsize heterogeneity for both antecedents and consequences of turnover. Relationships generally did not vary according to turnover type (e.g., total or voluntary), although the relative absence of collective-level involuntary turnover studies is noted and remains an important avenue for future research.Keywords: collective turnover, organizational performance, retention, meta-analysis Cause and Consequences 3The issue of collective turnover-that is, "the aggregate levels of employee departures that occur within groups, work units, or organizations" (Hausknecht & Trevor, 2011, p. 353)-has a long history in management and applied psychology research. Discussions of organizational-level turnover rates extend back nearly a century, as seen in early work addressing "rates of departure" (Greenwood, 1919, p. 187) and the "stability of employment" (Fish, 1917, p. 162). Topical interest further formalized via several influential accounts of collective turnover's causes and consequences (March & Simon, 1958;Mobley, 1982;Price, 1977;Staw, 1980). More recently, this attention has intensified in terms of empirical studies (e.g., Batt & Colvin, 2011;Shaw, Dineen, Fang, & Vellella, 2009;Siebert & Zubanov, 2009;Trevor & Nyberg, 2008), theoretical contributions (Dess & Shaw, 20...

show abstract

Participation and Organizational Commitment during Change

Lines¹,

Selart²

2013

The Wiley‐Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Leadership, Change, and Organizational Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keeping Your Headcount When All About You Are Losing Theirs: Downsizing, Voluntary Turnover Rates, and The Moderating Role of HR Practices

Cited by 287 publications

References 72 publications

Creating a more quit-friendly national workforce? Individual layoff history and voluntary turnover.

Creating a more quit-friendly national workforce? Individual layoff history and voluntary turnover.

Causes and consequences of collective turnover: A meta-analytic review.

Participation and Organizational Commitment during Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About