The Georgia Army National Guard has significantly improved its end-strength over the last eight years growing from 8700 to our current authorized strength of 11,100. This increase was the result of changes to our state's strength management philosophy, a transformation of the recruiting and retention force, and re-stationing of units to capitalize on demographics and spread capabilities across the state. The document that served as the catalyst for our strategic success can be found at the link to this message. The paper outlines the theory-research-application, and implication of focusing the Recruiting and Retention force on quality accessions and orienting them through the Recruit Sustainment Program while leaving retention duties on the chain of command. This model, to include the recruit sustainment program, was replicated nationally. The philosophy, coupled with the GA Recruiting and Retention Battalion 3-Year Strategic Transformation Plan, have been credited with significantly influencing the entire ARNG's direction and subsequent turn-around from end-strength decline to growth.

1. Realizing the three tenets of Strength Maintenance by focusing on
two: The impact of recruiting practices and attrition management
on long-term employee retention.
by
LTC Peter C. VanAmburgh, EdD
In post-September 11th America, commonly referred to as the
post-911 period, tremendous organizational and personnel challenges
have emerged in the Reserve Components (RC) of the United States
Army. The Army National Guard (ARNG) is the largest RC of the Army
and has a long-standing history of service to the country during times of
peace and conflict. However, not since World War II have such
monumental requirements been levied onto our citizen soldiers as in the
Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). Mobilizations of ARNG soldiers for
Operations Enduring Freedom (OEF), Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and Noble
Eagle (ONE) have exceeded 200,000 guardsmen and women (Deblois,
2004). The GWOT is an enormous long-term commitment for the ARNG
and it is likely that activations will exceed the 350,000 Endstrength (ES)
by mobilizing members one, two or three times during a career. This
potential commitment far exceeds the pre-911 paradigm of ARNG part-
time service and turnover is feared to present a potentially
insurmountable challenge to future staffing of ARNG units.

2. The process of continuous ES management in ARNG organizations
is referred to as Strength Maintenance (SM). In the post-911 period, SM
has become a primary focus for leaders at all levels to ensure ARNG
units are assigned the personnel necessary to meet the nation’s security
needs at home and abroad (Shultz, 2004). The ARNG SM philosophy
involves three tenets: recruiting, attrition management, and retention.
Recruiting is the first element of staffing and involves the identification,
selection and accession of members into the organization. Attrition
management is the inculcation process into the ARNG and ensuring
members meet their first-term of service obligations. Retention involves
keeping qualified soldiers in the organization. In sum, one tenet of the
ARNG SM philosophy is focused on accession (recruiting) with the
remaining two focused on reducing turnover (attrition management and
retention) (NGR 601-1, 2003).
Recruiting and retention recently emerged as the number one
employment issue facing 52% of employers surveyed by RewardsPlus of
America (Langan, 2000). The primary agencies called to fill unit
personnel vacancies and retain members of ARNG units are the
Recruiting and Retention Battalions (RRB’s) of each state (NGR 601-1,
2003). Combining the notion of corporate recruiting and employee
retention is well documented (Brownson & Harriman, 2000; Flynn &
Gillian, 1994; Langan 2000; Kenkel, 1997; ). Clearly the concepts are not
limited to the ARNG, but in a resource constrained environment with the
2

3. GWOT at hand, what is the focus: recruiting or retention? Which tenet of
the SM philosophy is the priority for members of the state RRB’s? And,
what does the research infer about the concepts of recruiting and its
impact on retention of personnel? This research project will attempt to
ascertain the answers by exploring the themes found in the literature
regarding employee recruiting and retention. The study will also attempt
to recommend the best focus for RRB personnel to impact the SM
posture of their states.
Factors Influencing Turnover
In the ARNG, attrition management and retention are tenets
focused on reducing turnover. A common definition of turnover “is the
rotation of workers around the labor market; between firms, and
occupations; and between states of employment and unemployment”
(Burgess, 1998). While planned member turnover can be healthy for
organizations, voluntary employee departures are generally characterized
as undesirable, disruptive and costly to organizations (Buck & Watson,
2002).
In the last two decades talented workers have shown a willingness
to abandon their job when it is economically convenient (Abbasi &
Hollman, 2000). Several studies have suggested that high and low
performers are generally more likely to leave while average performers are
more likely to remain (Jackofsky, 1984; Trevor, Gerhart & Boudreau,
1997; Williams & Livingstone, 1994). One can generally conclude that
3

4. turnover can be either functional or dysfunctional from the perspective of
who is departing the organization (Boudreau, 1991; Boudreau & Berger,
1985; Hollenbeck & Williams, 1986; Trevor, 2001). While some losses
may be regarded as positive (functional) for an organization as in poor
performer departures, the loss of talented performers can be
characterized as negative (dysfunctional) turnover.
The loss of high performers is a particularly crucial matter for
organizations (Sturman, Trevor, Boudreau & Gerhart, 2003). Oftentimes
the most talented employees will voluntarily part the organization in
disproportionate numbers over other performance groups (Abbasi &
Hollman, 2000). Both technical and institutional knowledge can be lost
in dysfunctional turnover resulting in damage to organizational
effectiveness. Several studies have concluded that dysfunctional turnover
correlates with a decline in morale and productivity among employees
who remain (O’Reilly, Caldwell, & Barnett, 1989; Sheehan 1993).
Additionally, institutions are often forced to commit substantial
resources to replacement efforts (Buck & Watson, 2002). The challenge
for organizations is to manage turnover in a way that allows functional
losses but reduces dysfunctional departures.
Job Satisfaction
Why employees voluntarily part from organizations has been widely
studied in an effort to find opportunities for improved productivity and
organizational commitment, lower absenteeism and turnover, and
4

5. increase organizational effectiveness (Ellickson, 2002). Job satisfaction
has been a focal concept in the quest to understand employee
productivity and related concepts (Agho, Price & Mueller, 1992). Job
satisfaction can be summated as “the extent to which employees like
their work” (Agho, Price & Mueller, 1992). A body of research has
concluded that job satisfaction may assist in explaining identification
with organizations (commitment), unscheduled absences from work
(absenteeism), and membership fluctuations (turnover) (Brooke & Price,
1989; Micheals & Spector, 1982; Mobley, Horner & Hollingsworth, 1978;
Mowday, Porter & Steers, 1982; Mueller & Price, 1990). However, several
researchers have questioned the importance of job satisfaction to
productivity (Iaffaldano & Muchinsky, 1985) and its relationship with
absenteeism is not well-established (Nicholson, Brown & Chadwick-
Jones, 1976). Nevertheless, job satisfaction does appear to assist in
understanding the major themes associated with employee turnover.
Several authors have concluded that an employee’s autonomy to
make decisions related to the work has a positive impact on job
satisfaction, while routinization of tasks appears to negatively affect job
satisfaction (Agho, Price & Mueller, 1992). Work group cohesion, the
extent that close friendships exist in immediate work teams, also appears
to influence job satisfaction (Jones & James, 1979; James & Jones,
1992). While these studies looked at various aspects of the work and
5

6. environment, other research has been conducted concerning individual
personality variables to explain job satisfaction.
Attitudinal predisposition is a personality variable based on an
individuals general affect, or liking, of aspects of the work or
environment. Positive affectivity refers to a person’s predisposition to be
happy across time and situations while negative affectivity is a
predisposition to experience discomfort across time and situations
(Watson, Pennebaker & Folger, 1987). In essence, employees who are
predisposed to be happy over time and situations are more likely to have
higher job satisfaction that those who are predisposed to negative
affectivity. The ability to differentiate individual predisposition and job
satisfaction determinants has been a point of dissention among scholars.
However, Agho, Price & Mueller (1992) have found evidence that job
satisfaction and affectivity are separate variables easily discerned by
organizational members and therefore should be viewed as such. Agho,
Price & Mueller’s (1992) research suggests an individual’s affectivity
predisposition may help explain long-term job satisfaction ratings.
Organizational Commitment
Another part of the literature concerning employee retention
involves the concept of organizational commitment. Meyer & Allen (1997)
define organizational commitment as a “psychological state that (a)
characterizes the employees relationship with the organization, and (b)
has implications for the decision to continue membership in the
6

7. organization.” Organizational commitment is distinctly different from the
variable of job satisfaction in both affectivity and episode. Mowdays,
Steers & Porter (1979) describe the distinction:
As an attitude, commitment differs from the concept of job
satisfaction in several ways. To begin with, commitment as a construct is
more global, reflecting a general affective response to the organization as
a whole. Job satisfaction, on the other hand, reflects one’s response
either to one’s job or to certain aspects of one’s job. Hence, commitment
emphasizes attachment to the employing organization, including its goals
and values, while satisfaction emphasizes the specific task environment
where an employee performs his or her duties.
In addition, organizational commitment should be somewhat more
stable over time than job satisfaction. Although day-to-day events in the
work place may affect an employee’s level of job satisfaction, such
transitory events should not cause and employee to seriously reevaluate
his or her attachment to the organization. (p.226)
Three constructs are associated with the review of organizational
commitment: affective, continuance, and normative levels of
commitment. Affective commitment is an employee’s emotional
attachment to an organization. Continuance is derived from the
perceived cost of disassociation from an organization and normative
commitment refers to an individual’s feeling of obligation to remain with
an organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991).
Several researchers have indicated that a positive correlation exists
between an employee’s level of commitment to an organization and their
desire to stay (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Steers, 1977). Miller (1996)
suggested that an employee’s decision to remain with an organization is
largely based on their level of commitment. Additionally, organizational
commitment has been demonstrated to have a negative correlation with
7

8. employee turnover – as turnover increases, organizational commitment
decreases (Cotton & Tuttle, 1986). Organizational commitment also
appears to be an antecedent to an employee’s intent to leave the
workplace (Tett & Meyer, 1993).
Hiring Practices
Hiring practices emerge as an important part of the research
concerning recruiting and subsequent retention of employees. A
consistent theme in the literature is that organizations can reduce
turnover by utilizing appropriate selection processes (Buck & Watson,
2002). Inadequate hiring processes are both costly in actual accession
expenditures and follow-on turnover (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000).
The first element of the hiring process is identifying the
appropriate person for employment. Several authors have suggested that
the quality of applicant is an antecedent to potential turnover (Kenkel,
1997; ). For military employment, the classification of applicants for
service is scored using the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
(ASVAB). The ASVAB categorizes applicants into aptitude Categories
(CAT) I to IV. There is significant statistical evidence that a high
classification category (CAT I to IIIA) translates into high trainability.
There is additional evidence that high school diploma recipients are more
likely to successfully complete Initial Entry Training (IET) and their first
term of service. Therefore the quality of the applicant, CAT I to IIIA with a
high school diploma, benefits the service by their potential for completion
8

9. of training and reduced turnover (Knowles, Parlier, Hoscheit, Ayer,
Lyman, & Fancher, 2002).
Several studies have examined and found that “truth in recruiting”
appears to lower post-hire turnover (Premack & Wanous, 1985). Evidence
exists that realistic expectancies communicated during the recruiting
process may improve retention of employees (Wanous, 1989). The
examination of expectancies and their impact on employee motivation
and satisfaction can be found in the tenets of Expectancy theory.
Expectancy theory is based on the premise that an act will be
followed by an outcome (Vroom, 1964). Yeatts & Hyten (1998) identify the
three components of expectancy theory as:
1. Expectancy or degree of confidence a person has with
regard to his or her ability to successfully accomplish the
desired behavior.
2. Instrumentality or the degree of confidence a person has
that if the behavior is performed successfully he or she will
be rewarded appropriately.
3. Valence or the value a person places on the expected rewards.
(p. 63)
The model assumes that people will be motivated and exhibit
behaviors based on the expectancies of the outcome of their actions. The
strength of their motivation and the influence on their behavior is linked
to the value assigned or perceived of the outcome. The value, or valence,
is directly related to the preference or needs of the individual (Vroom,
1964; Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler & Wieck, 1970).
9

10. When expectancy theory is applied to the hiring process, an
applicant’s motivation for employment is likely based on the expectancies
formed through communication with the recruiter. The valence of
employment and the rewards (intrinsic and/or extrinsic) become the
impetus for the individual to join and become and organizational
member.
Expectancy theory can be related to both motivation and
satisfaction regarding work activities. A major tenet of expectancy theory
is that while satisfaction may not be derived from meeting expectations,
dissatisfaction is likely to occur if expectations are not met (Campbell
Dunnette, Lawler & Wieck, 1970). For example, an enlistee may contract
with an enlistment bonus to be paid upon the completion of IET. The
valence of the enlistment bonus influences the soldier to exhibit the
desired behavior and complete IET. The soldier completes IET and is paid
the bonus following completion of the requirement. Although the
expectancy of an act (completion of IET) was followed by an outcome (the
payment of the bonus), one cannot predict the soldier’s satisfaction with
the instrumentality. However, if the soldier exhibits behavior with the
expectancy of receiving the bonus immediately following the completion
of IET and the bonus is not forthcoming or paid at all, dissatisfaction
with the system is likely to occur. Expectancy theory is a strong
motivational and satisfaction model. For employers, ensuring realistic
expectations are set by recruiting personnel is likely to assist in reducing
10

11. dissatisfaction among employees and thereby impacting turnover of the
force (Wanous, Poland, Premack & Davis, 1992).
Summary
The literature associated with employee turnover has several
themes important to the discussion of recruiting and retention activities.
First, one must acknowledge that turnover may be considered functional
or dysfunctional depending on who is departing the organization
(Sturman, Trevor, Boudreau & Gerhart, 2003). The focus of retention
efforts should clearly be on top performers to reduce dysfunctional
turnover and the negative outcomes associated with these losses.
To retain employees, three major areas of research emerge that
address the retention phenomenon: job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, and hiring practices. Job satisfaction involves aspects of
the work environment, the work itself and attitudinal predisposition of
affectivity. Organizational commitment involves a more stable concept to
judge long-term retention along several constructs: normative,
continuance, and affective levels of commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997).
Hiring practices are another area associated with employee retention and
involve specifically targeted applicants of a quality that will likely provide
long-term employment with organizations. Hiring practices also involve
the tenets of expectancy theory regarding the setting of realistic
expectancies of the work and the organization.
11

12. The general theme for employee retention, based on the literature,
can be divided into three interconnected processes. First, hiring practices
involving realistic work expectancies and focused on the accession of
high performance personnel with an attitudinal predisposition for
positive affectivity, will likely reduce dysfunctional turnover. Second, a
program that inculcates new employees using the three constructs of
organizational commitment for reinforcement (including aligning their
personal goals and vision with that of the organization), should improve
long-term employee retention. Finally, employers must be cognizant of
the concept of job satisfaction and strive to improve both the tasks being
performed and the work environment as these factors may assist in
improving long-term organizational commitment and retention of top
performers.
The Recruiting & Retention Battalion (RRB) and
the Recruit Sustainment Program (RSP)
RRB’s are tasked to recruit and retain members of the ARNG to
ensure ES meets or exceeds readiness objectives. The summary in the
previous section provides the major research themes associated with
turnover. When the RRB is viewed in the context of these themes a
question emerges: what influence does the RRB have in the areas of
hiring practices, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction?
As the sole accession authority in the ARNG, the RRB clearly has a
tremendous influence in the hiring methods and practices employed to
12

13. identify and recruit applicants. The research has provided strong
evidence that the quality of accessions is an important part of long-term
retention of employees (Knowles, Parlier, Hoscheit, Ayer, Lymam &
Fancher, 2002). Organizational commitment and job satisfaction, other
key concepts associated with retention, are not so easily influenced by
RRB’s. How can a RRB improve organizational commitment and job
satisfaction among members?
It would appear that major influences on the phenomena of
organizational commitment and job satisfaction generally lie with unit
leadership. Organizational leaders establish the command climate,
structure tasks and the operating environment, and build unit cohesion
(AR 20-1). So, how can the RRB reduce dysfunctional turnover when
arguably the largest element of long-term retention (organizational
commitment and job satisfaction) falls in the purview of organizational
leaders?
An area of emphasis in the literature suggests that organizational
commitment starts with the inculcation of new members into the
organization (Rynes, 1991; Wanous, 1989). New member orientation, or
sponsorship, appears important for meeting initial employment
expectations, socializing new members, and building both affective and
normative levels of commitment. The RRB’s have a key role in the
process of inculcating new members through the RSP.
13

14. The RSP is the first step in the organizational process of attrition
management. It is a model to provide initial employee sponsorship and
prepare Non-prior Service (NPS) recruits for the rigors of IET. The RSP is
designed with a mission to reduce dysfunctional turnover prior to and
during IET.
The RSP provides the RRB the link and ideal forum for beginning
the process of long-term commitment among new members of the
organization. The RRB provides a primary role in the hiring process by
the development of expectations and selection of quality applicants. The
RSP, under the command and control of the RRB, thereby becomes the
initial element of the organization to meet the expectations set in the
recruiting process. By meeting or exceeding enlistment expectations, and
structuring the work tasks and environment to make effective use of
available time and resources, the RSP has an opportunity to impact
initial job satisfaction with the organization. The unity of command (RRB
directing the RSP) provides both a mutually supportive environment and
congruence between what applicants are told and what they experience
as recruits.
The RSP’s unique responsibility to inculcate new members into the
organization is another important element in long-term retention of
soldiers. The period of initial entry into an organization is where early
expectations are met and long-term expectations are developed (Wanous,
Poland, Premack & Davis, 1992). The sponsorship process of the RSP
14

15. should be focused on welcoming new members and aligning their goals
and aspirations with the mission, goals, values and vision of the
organization.
When viewing the three constructs of organizational commitment
and the organization’s ability to influence commitment over a typical 6-
year enlistment, it is clear where the RRB and unit leadership have
ownership. Figure 1.0 is a graphic and prescriptive model displaying the
period of enlistment, ability to influence, and constructs of commitment
most important and prevalent for employee retention.
Figure 1.0 graphs the commitment influence ability of the RRB and
unit leadership. In the first year of enlistment, the RRB has the most
important role in influencing new employee commitment through the
hiring process and the RSP. The key constructs of commitment during
this phase of enlistment are affective and normative commitment. As the
enlistment progresses along the 6-year time horizon, the unit leadership
becomes the primary influence to those elements of commitment. Only in
the latter period does the RRB become involved during the process of
retention interviews. Coinciding with the RRB involvement is the
additional construct of continuance commitment and improving the
knowledge of benefits and other services potentially lost by a soldier who
elects to self select out of the organization (unwilling to extend or
reenlist).
15

16. Figure 1.0 Prescriptive Model of Retention Influence & Organizational
Commitment over a typical 6-year enlistment in the Georgia Army
National Guard
Greater
Commitment
Influence UNIT
Level LEADERSHIP
REC & RET
BATTALION
Lesser
Commitment Continuance
constructs and Normative
importance for
retention Affective
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3-4 YEAR 5-6
TIME
The model in Figure 1.0 is prescriptive in that it displays the most
prevalent commitment construct and the organizational element (RRB or
Unit Leadership) that should take the lead in improving member
commitment during specific periods of a 6-year enlistment. Process
ownership of commitment-focused activities during various portions of
an enlistment is potentially important for developing the three constructs
of commitment for the purpose of reducing dysfunctional employee
turnover.
16

17. The Georgia ARNG RRB Prototype
The RRB of the Georgia ARNG (GAARNG) has developed an action
research model focused on reducing long-term turnover in the force. The
model uses two tenets of SM, recruiting and attrition management, to
improve employee retention. Themes in the research were explored in the
context of ARNG recruiting and retention for application and implications
to reduce turnover. The intent of the prototype program is to apply the
prescriptive model and place ownership, accountability and unity of
command over the tenets of SM that the RRB can significantly influence,
and the same for areas unit commanders can influence.
Georgia’s RRB model is focused on two critical and interrelated
areas involving NPS recruits: hiring practices and organizational
commitment. Unit commanders are given the sole mission of retention of
first term (outside the RSP), obligor and careerist soldiers. RRB recruiting
is centered on improving hiring practices by ensuring the communication
of realistic work expectancies and the accession of high performance NPS
personnel (CAT I to IIIA), preferably with an attitudinal disposition for
positive affectivity. The focus on NPS accessions continues in the RSP,
under the command and control of the RRB.
The RSP is a regionally oriented (five sites, or detachments, in the
state) and standardized program for all NPS recruits enlisted into the
GAARNG. The RSP in Georgia is designed to meet four major objectives:
(1) inculcate, or sponsor, new employees into the Georgia ARNG; (2)
17

18. provide NPS recruits the confidence and capability to be successful
completing IET; (3) develop a base for long term organizational
commitment using the three constructs of commitment for
reinforcement; and (4) meet or exceed enlistment expectations regarding
work tasks and work environment (job satisfaction).
The RSP is commanded by a member of the RRB fulltime staff. The
RSP site NCOIC’s, both Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) and Active Duty
Special Work (ADSW), are physically assigned to each detachment
location to perform unit-level supervisory duties. Support for the RSP is
provided by the RRB staff and production personnel. Production Team
NCOIC’s and their personnel are aligned with particular detachments for
oversight and support. Upon accession in the GAARNG, all NPS recruits
are attached by orders to the closest regional site near their home of
record. NPS soldiers remain attached to their respective detachment until
they have graduated IET and a unit sponsor is available for an official
handover.
The unity of command and congruence between the RRB and RSP
is critical for reducing turnover. An institutionalized check and balance
is immediately available to the RRB commander. The quality and
expectations of the NPS recruit are visible in the RSP. Consequently, the
RSP must meet/or exceed the expectations of the NPS force attached,
prepare them for IET, and begin building long-term commitment.
Variations in recruit quality, ship rates, sponsorship, training, and job
18

19. satisfaction are discernable and correctable under the command and
control of the RRB through the production lines or RSP.
Ultimately the long-term retention of quality soldiers lies in their
individual commitment to the GAARNG. Unit commanders have the task
of reducing turnover in their organizations by building strong teams,
esprit de corps, organizational commitment and staying cognizant of the
work tasks and environment (job satisfaction). Retention is therefore best
left to the unit commanders. The RRB contributes to this tenet by
recruiting quality applicants with realistic expectations of their
assignment and inculcating and preparing them to meet their initial
employment expectations through the RSP.
The clear delineation of responsibility between unit commanders
and the RRB is important for focused effort by each entity. Specific
direction and appropriate standards of accountability should allow for
improved results in each of the three SM tenets: recruiting, attrition
management, and retention. As depicted in the prescriptive model found
in Figure 1.0, the unit command climate and the long-term
organizational commitment necessary for unit-level retention is best
influenced by unit leaders. However, the RRB can contribute to reducing
dysfunctional turnover during the first portion of an enlistment period.
The hiring processes, initial job satisfaction and the start point for
building of organizational commitment among NPS recruits are factors
best influenced by the RRB and RSP. In essence, by the RRB focusing on
19

20. the two tenets of recruiting and attrition management, results may be felt
on the third tenet of retention.
20

21. References
Abbasi, S., & Hollman, K. (2000). Turnover: the real bottom line. Public
Personnel Management, V29, No3.
Agho, A., Price, J., & Mueller, C. (1992). Discriminant validity of
measures of job satisfaction, positive affectivity and negative affectivity.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65.
Boudreau, J. (1991). Utility analysis for decisions in human resource
management. In M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of
industrial and organizational psychology, 2nd ed. Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologist Press.
Boudreau, J., & Berger, C. (1985). Decision-theoretic utility analysis
applied to employee separations and acquisitions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 70.
Brooke, P., & Price, J. (1989). The determinants of employee
absenteeism: An empirical test of a causal model. Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 62.
Brownson, K., & Harriman, R. (2000). Recruiting and retaining staff in
the twenty-first century. Hospital Management Quarterly, 22.
Buck, J., & Watson, J. (2002). Retaining staff employees: the relationship
between human resource management strategies and organizational
commitment. Innovative Higher Education, V26, No3.
Burgess, S. (1998, July). Analyzing firms, jobs, and turnover. Monthly
Labor Review.
Campbell, J., Dunnette, M., Lawler, E., & Weick, K. (1970). Expectancy
theory. In W. Natemeyer & J. Gilberg (Eds.), Classics of Organizational
Behavior (2nd ed.). Danville, IL: Interstate Printers & Publishers.
Cotton, J., & Tuttle, J. (1986). Employee turnover: a meta-analysis and
review with implications for research. Academy of Management Review,
11.
Deblois, R. (2004). Presentation at the Recruiting and Retention
Conference, June 25, 2004.
Ellickson, M. (2002, Fall). Determinants of job satisfaction of municipal
government employees. Public Personnel Management, 31.
21

22. Flynn, G. (1994). Attracting the right employees – and keeping them.
Personnel Journal, 73.
Hollenbeck, J., & Williams, C. (1986). Turnover functionality versus
turnover frequency: A note on work attitudes and organizational
effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71.
Iaffaldano, M., & Muchinsky, P. (1985). Job satisfaction and job
performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97.
Jackofsky, F. (1984). Turnover and job performance: An integrated
process model. Academy of Management Review, 9.
James, L., & Jones, L. (1992). Psychological climate and affect: Test of a
hierarchical dynamic model. In C. Cranny, P. Smith, & E. Stone (Eds.),
Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects
their performance. New York: Lexington.
Jones, A., & James, L. (1979). Psychological climate: Dimensions and
relationships of individual and aggregated work environment
perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23.
Kenkel, J. (1997). A university president’s perspective on recruitment,
retention and quality. Journal of Chemical Education, 74.
Knowles, J., Parlier, G., Hoscheit, G., Ayer, R., Lyman, K., & Fancher, R.
(2002). Reinventing Army Recruiting. Interfaces, 32.
Langan, S. (2000, Winter). Finding the needle in the haystack: The
challenge of recruiting sharp employees. Public Personnel Management,
29.
Mathieu, J., & Zajac, D. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the
antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational
commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108.
Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory,
research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Micheals, C., & Spector, P. (1982). Causes of employee turnover: A test of
the Mobley, Griffith, Hand, and Meglino Model. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 67.
22

23. Miller, O. (1996). Employee turnover in the public sector. New York:
Garland.
Mobley, W., Horner, S., & Hollinsworth, A. (1978). An evaluation of the
precursors of hospital employee turnover. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 63.
Mowday, R., Porter, L., & Steers, R. (1982). Employee-organizational
linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover.
New York: Academic Press.
Mowday, R., Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of
organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14.
Mueller, C., & Price, J. (1990). Economic, psychological, and sociological
determinants of voluntary turnover. Journal of Behavioral Economics,
19.
Nicholson, N., Brown, C., & Chadwick-Jones, J. (1976). Absence from
work and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61.
NGR 601-1 (2003). Army National Guard Strength Maintenance Program.
Arlington, VA: Department of the Army, National Guard Bureau.
O’Rielly, C., Caldwell, D., & Barnett, W. (1989). Work group demography,
social integration, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34.
Premack, S., & Wanous, J. (1985). A meta-analysis of realistic job
preview experiments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70.
Robbert, A., Keltner, B., Reynolds, K., Spranca, M., & Benjamin, B.
(1997). Differentiation in Military Human Resource Management.
Wasington, DC: Rand Corporation.
Rynes, S. (1991). Recruitment, job choice, and post-hire consequences: A
call for new research directions. In M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds.),
Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 2.
Shultz, R. (2004). Electronic communication July 28, 2004.
Steers, R. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational
commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22.
23

24. Sturman, M., Trevor, C., Boudreau, J., & Gerhart, B. (2003). Is it worth it
to win the talent war? Evaluating the utility of performance-based pay.
Personnel Psychology, 56.
Tett, R., & Meyer, J. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
turnover intention, and turnover: Path analyses based on meta-
analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46.
Trevor, C. (2001). Interactive effects among ease of movement
determinants and job satisfaction in the prediction of voluntary
turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44.
Trevor, C., Gerhart, B., & Boudreau, J. (1997). Voluntary turnover and
job performance: Curvilinearity and the moderating influences of
salary growth and promotions. Journal of Applied Pschology, 82.
Wanous, J. (1989). Installing a realistic job preview: Ten tough choices.
Personnel Psychology, 42.
Wanous, J., Poland, T., Premack, S., & Davis, G. (1992). The effects of
met expectations and newcomer attitudes and behaviors: A review and
meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77.
Watson, D., Pennebaker, J., & Folger, R. (1987). Beyond negative
affectivity: Measuring stress and satisfaction in the workplace. Journal
of Organizational Behavior Management, 8.
Williams, C., & Livingston, L. (1994). Another look at the relationship
bewteen performance and voluntary turnover. Academy of
Management Journal, 37.
Vroom, V. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley.
Yeatts, D., & Hyten C. (1998). High Performing Self-Managed Work
Teams: Comparison of Theory to Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24