431828
al.Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
© Baker College 2012
JLOs19110.1177/1548051811431828Tews et
Reprints and permission: http://www.
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
The Fundamental Role of Workplace
Fun in Applicant Attraction
Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies
19(1) 105–114
© Baker College 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1548051811431828
http://jlos.sagepub.com
Michael J. Tews1, John W. Michel2, and Albert Bartlett1
Abstract
The present study extended previous research on fun in the workplace by examining the influence of workplace fun in
the context of applicant attraction. Specifically, this research examined the impact of workplace fun relative to other key
predictors of applicant attraction. Furthermore, this research examined the impact of different sources of workplace
fun—fun coworker interactions, fun job responsibilities, and formal fun activities. With a sample of collegiate job seekers,
the results demonstrated that workplace fun was a stronger predictor of applicant attraction than compensation and
opportunities for advancement. Moreover, the results demonstrated that fun coworker interactions and fun job
responsibilities were stronger predictors of applicant attraction than formal fun activities.
Keywords
workplace fun, applicant attraction, recruiting
In today’s competitive business environment, organizations
continue to emphasize the deployment of human capital
as a key source of competitive advantage (Ployhart &
Moliterno, 2011). As a fundamental first step toward ensuring a productive workforce, attracting high-quality applicants
is important. In the absence of a highly qualified applicant
pool from which to select potential employees, job vacancies may be left unfilled, selection standards may be compromised, more time and resources may need to be allocated
toward training, and job and organizational performance
may ultimately suffer. Conversely, drawing from a highly
qualified applicant pool provides the foundation for an
effective human resource management system and effective
organizational performance. As such, it is important for
organizations to find ways to attract the best and the brightest applicants in hopes of winning the war for talent.
Previous research has demonstrated that individuals
largely make job choice decisions based on their perceptions of job and vacancy characteristics (Behling, Labovitz,
& Gainer, 1968; Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin, &
Jones, 2005). These perceptions may relate to the specific
job or the organization as a whole (Chapman et al., 2005).
In particular, Chapman et al. (2005) demonstrated that
compensation, opportunities for advancement, the type of
work, the work environment, and organizational image
were among the strongest predictors in their meta-analysis
on the antecedents of applicant attraction to jobs and
organizations.
One underresearched job and organizational characteristic that may have a significant impact on applicant attraction
is workplace fun. Workplace fun generally refers to “any
social, interpersonal, or task activities at work of a playful or humorous nature which provide an individual with
amusement, enjoyment, or pleasure” (Fluegge, 2008, p. 5).
A growing body of empirical research has demonstrated
that workplace fun may have positive outcomes for organizations, yet research on workplace fun in a recruiting context has been limited. Perceptions of workplace fun may be
particularly important with respect to applicant attraction as
individuals may not want “all work and no play” and seek
intrinsic satisfaction in addition to tangible rewards through
their work. As such, individuals’ perceptions of workplace
fun represent a potentially strong predictor of applicant
attraction.
The goals of the present study are twofold. The first goal
is to examine the impact of workplace fun relative to other
key predictors of applicant attraction. The second goal is to
examine the impact of different sources of workplace fun
on applicant attraction. Workplace fun is a multifaceted
construct, and some aspects of fun may have a stronger
impact on applicant attraction than others. Specifically,
this research will assess the impact of fun coworker
interactions, fun job responsibilities, and formal fun
1
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
Towson University, Towson, MD, USA
2
Corresponding Author:
Michael J. Tews, School of Hospitality Management, 121 Mateer Building,
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
Email: mjt17@psu.edu
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at SAN JOSE STATE UNIV on November 25, 2015
106
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)
activities. These issues will be examined with a sample of
collegiate job seekers, mostly Millennials, who may particularly value fun when making job choice decisions. The
results from this study will help validate the importance of
fun in the workplace in a recruiting context and provide guidance for marketing job vacancies to prospective employees.
Research on Workplace Fun
Fun in the workplace has long been promoted as a key
mechanism for enhancing organizational effectiveness. The
roots of the modern workplace fun movement can be found
in the writings of Peters and Waterman (1982) and Deal
and Kennedy (1982), who encouraged managers to develop
corporate cultures that promoted play, humor, and fun.
More recently, in popular press publications the philosophy
of fun at work has been promoted widely as a key ingredient for energized and productive work environments
(Lundin, Paul, & Christensen, 2000). In fact, a number of
organizations, such as Pike Place Fish Market, Google,
IBM, and Southwest Airlines, have incorporated fun into
their corporate cultures (Collinson, 2002; Karl, Peluchette,
Hall, & Harland, 2005; Sunoo, 1995). It has been argued
that fun may affect a host of favorable organizational outcomes, such as higher job satisfaction, employee morale,
pride in work, creativity, customer service, and retention, as
well as reduced tardiness, absenteeism, anxiety, and burnout (Abner, 1997; Abramis, 1989; Lundin et al., 2000).
A small but growing body of empirical research provides
support for the popular claim that fun has positive outcomes
for organizations. For example, McDowell (2004) provided
evidence that fun is positively related to job satisfaction and
affective organizational commitment and negatively related
to turnover intentions. Karl and Peluchette (2006a) found
that fun was positively related to job satisfaction and negatively related to emotional exhaustion. Similarly, Karl,
Peluchette, and Harland (2007) demonstrated that fun was
positively related to job satisfaction, as well as negatively
related to emotional exhaustion and emotional dissonance.
Karl and Peluchette (2006b) found that fun was positively
related to job satisfaction and employees’ perceptions of
customer service quality, and Karl, Peluchette, and Hall
(2008) demonstrated that fun was positively related to job
satisfaction and negatively related to turnover intentions.
Finally, Fluegge (2008) found that fun was positively
related to work engagement, positive affect, task performance, creative performance, and organizational citizenship behavior.
Karl et al.’s (2008) research represents the one extant
study that discussed workplace fun in a recruiting context.
Karl et al. had the volunteers in their study rank order the
importance of various job and organizational characteristics. The authors argued that the resulting rankings could
be used to determine how best to market volunteer
opportunities to individuals. Of the 10 items that were
ranked, “interesting work” and “helping others” were the
two most highly rated items. However, “a fun workplace”
was the second to last lowest rated item. Furthermore, “the
opportunity to socialize,” which can be subsumed within
the workplace fun construct, was the lowest rated item.
Despite the low ranking for fun, Karl et al. argued that fun
could still be used to attract individuals to volunteer opportunities. One possible reason noted by the authors is that
self-report ratings are susceptible to social desirability
bias. As such, the volunteers may have underestimated the
importance of fun in volunteer activities. Furthermore, fun
may be more important in less altruistic organizational contexts as compared with a volunteer environment.
The Present Study
Given that fun has been demonstrated to affect other favorable workplace outcomes, fun likely has a positive impact
on applicant attraction to jobs and organizations. That said,
research is necessary to empirically assess the impact of
perceptions of workplace fun in an applicant attraction
context. Research is also necessary to determine what
aspects of fun most strongly affect applicant attraction.
Thus, in addition to examining the impact of fun in general,
the present study will examine the relative impact of three
aspects of workplace fun—fun coworker interactions, fun
job responsibilities, and formal fun activities.
The environment processing and interactionalist models
are two dominant metatheories of applicant attraction
(Ehrhart & Ziegert, 2005) that can be used to explain the
potential influence of workplace fun on applicant attraction. According to the environment processing perspective,
applicants search for information about various characteristics about the work environment (e.g., organizational policies, coworker characteristics, and benefits) throughout the
recruiting process. They then use such perceptions of the
work environment as signals to determine how well they
believe they will fit with the organization and make job
choice decisions accordingly (Turban, 2001). Similarly,
the interactionist perspective suggests that applicants are
attracted to organizations when they perceive a fit between
their needs and values and those espoused by the organization (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). The
interactionist perspective is founded in the similarity-attraction
paradigm, which suggests that applicants are more attracted
to organizations when specific organizational characteristics match their own (Schneider, Goldstein, & Smith, 1995).
As such, the applicants are more attracted to an organization when it provides something important that the applicant wants or needs (Ehrhart & Ziegert, 2005). The
common element between these two perspectives is that
individuals seek out work environments where they perceive the best fit.
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at SAN JOSE STATE UNIV on November 25, 2015
107
Tews et al.
Workplace fun may meet individuals’ needs and values
in several respects, and therefore, perceptions of workplace
fun may have a significant impact on applicant attraction.
Certainly one of the primary reasons why individuals work
is for the compensation and benefits that a paycheck provides (Williams, McDaniel, & Nguyen, 2006). That said,
individuals work for more than just a paycheck and seek
intrinsic satisfaction, enjoyment in their work, and quality relationships with others (Grant & Parker, 2009).
Accordingly, perceptions of workplace fun may affect applicant attraction given the large portion of time individuals
spend on the job. Given the vast amount of time spent on the
job, clearly individuals would prefer the experience to be
enjoyable and to “have fun.” Fun may be particularly relevant during difficult economic times such as these, where
employees are being asked to do more for less (White,
2008). Similarly, given the significant amount of stress often
experienced by individuals in today’s workplace (Podsakoff,
LePine, & LePine, 2007), perceptions of workplace fun may
signal a higher quality of work life and thus enhance applicant attraction during the recruiting process.
Workplace fun may be particularly important for
younger job seekers, the job seekers that are the focus of
the present study. In one respect, workplace fun may be
important for younger job seekers in general. Erikson’s
(1968) lifespan theory suggests that young adults particularly value the development of friendships and socialization as they establish their adult identities. The workplace
may provide younger individuals with sources of friendship and socialization. Thus, to the extent that friendships and socialization can be construed as workplace
fun, fun may be particularly important for younger job
seekers. Moreover, workplace fun may be particularly
important for younger workers today, namely, the
Millennials, the generational cohort of those individuals
born in 1980 onwards (Parker & Chusmir, 1990; Wey
Smola & Sutton, 2002). Such individuals grew up in a
period of relative prosperity, have experienced relatively comfortable lifestyles, and were raised by highly
involved parents (Raines, 2003). In the workplace, the
Millennials desire a work–life balance that will allow
them to balance play with work (Carless & Wintle, 2007;
Cennamo & Gardner, 2008; Loughlin & Barling, 2001;
Wey Smola & Sutton, 2002; Zemke, Raines, & Filipczak.,
1999), and they value close personal relationships over a
career per se (Raines, 2003). It has been argued that the
Millennials prefer work environments that emphasize
freedom, status, and social involvement, and they may be
prepared to leave the organization if these needs are not
met (Crumpacker & Crumpacker, 2007; Dries, Pepermans,
& De Kerpel, 2008; Loughlin & Barling, 2001; Wey Smola
& Sutton, 2002). As such, workplace fun may be particularly important to younger job seekers with respect to
attraction to jobs and organizations.
Based on the arguments above, two hypotheses are proposed. First, workplace fun will have a positive impact on
applicant attraction. Second, workplace fun will have a
stronger impact on applicant attraction than other key predictors of applicant attraction, namely, compensation and
opportunities for advancement (Chapman et al., 2005).
Although compensation and opportunities for advancement
likely influence applicant attraction, workplace fun is argued
to have a stronger impact given the high priority placed on
fun among Millennials.
Hypothesis 1: Workplace fun will have a positive
impact on applicant attraction.
Hypothesis 2: Workplace fun will have a stronger
positive impact on applicant attraction than compensation and opportunities for advancement.
Heretofore, fun has been discussed in general terms. It
should be emphasized, however, that fun is a multidimensional construct that has been operationalized differently
across studies. Ford, McLaughlin, and Newstrom (2003),
Karl et al. (2005), Karl et al. (2008), and Peluchette and Karl
(2005) focused on formal fun activities, such as contests,
gift exchanges, games, awards, sharing food and refreshments, and company-wide outings. Karl and Peluchette
(2006a), Karl and Peluchette (2006b), Karl et al. (2007),
and Peluchette and Karl (2005) focused on experienced fun,
which reflects whether individuals actually experience fun
on the job. Sample items from the scale used in these studies include “This is a fun place to work” and “We laugh
a lot at my workplace.” Finally, Fluegge (2008) and
McDowell (2004) conceptualized fun as a multidimensional construct, encompassing socializing, celebrating,
personal freedoms, and global fun. Socializing reflects fun
interactions with others at work, celebrating includes formal fun activities, personal freedoms represent freedom to
have fun on the job, and global fun reflects whether the
workplace in general is a fun place to work. It should be
noted that while Fluegge (2008) and McDowell (2004)
conceptualized fun as encompassing different dimensions,
the dimensions were aggregated into an overall construct in
their studies.
Notwithstanding the validity of previous research and
focusing on fun as an aggregate construct, we contend it is
necessary to examine the impact of different aspects of fun
on applicant attraction. Focusing on different aspects of fun
will help delineate what matters most for applicants. Three
aspects of workplace fun will serve as the focus of the present study—formal fun activities, fun coworker interactions,
and fun–job responsibilities. Formal fun activities include
parties and picnics, theme days at work, and company outings. Such activities have been a common focus of popularized accounts of fun at work and several empirical
investigations. Because coworkers are central to most
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at SAN JOSE STATE UNIV on November 25, 2015
108
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)
employees’ experiences on the job (Chiaburu & Harrison,
2008), fun coworker interactions are examined herein. Fun
coworker interactions are characterized as being friendly,
outgoing, and socializing with each other. Finally, fun job
responsibilities are included in the current framework as the
job reflects the core of the applicants’ potential work. These
are characterized as those that are personally enjoyable,
meaningful, and a solid fit with one’s personal interests.
While all three dimensions may have a significant positive impact on applicant attraction, some dimensions of fun
may have a stronger influence than others. Specifically, we
argue that fun formal activities will be less important than
fun coworker interactions and fun job responsibilities. As
noted above, formal fun activities have been the focus of
much of the popular fun literature and several empirical
investigations. The popular press has advocated implementing a variety of ways to create a fun work climate, and the
empirical investigations in this area have largely focused on
which activities are actually considered fun and which are
not. With respect to applicant attraction, formal fun activities may not necessarily have the strongest impact because
they are by definition “formal activities.” While they may
be perceived as enjoyable, formal activities do not necessarily permeate the day-to-day experiences for employees. As
such, formal fun activities may have less of an influence on
applicant attraction than other aspects of workplace fun. In
contrast, fun coworker interactions and fun job responsibilities are believed to have a stronger impact. Simply put,
because coworker interactions and one’s job responsibilities are constant and regular features of one’s experiences,
they likely have a greater opportunity to affect one’s experienced fun at work. Accordingly, fun coworker interactions and fun job responsibilities are argued to have a
stronger impact on applicant attraction than formal fun
activities.
Hypothesis 3: Fun coworker interactions will have
a stronger positive impact on applicant attraction
than will formal fun activities.
Hypothesis 4: Fun job responsibilities will have a
stronger positive impact on applicant attraction than
will formal fun activities.
Method
Sample and Procedure
The sample for this research included 374 undergraduate
students from two large universities who were in their final
semester of school and actively seeking full-time employment upon graduation. The sample was 56% female and 77%
Caucasian. The average age was 22 years. The job seekers were
presented with two different written recruiting scenarios to
assess the impact of fun and the other variables on attraction. The
participants read each scenario and then answered a series
of questions related to applicant attraction.
Scenario 1—Fun, Compensation,
and Opportunities for Advancement
The participants were presented with a recruiting advertisement for a management trainee position for a fictitious
organization to assess the overall impact of fun on applicant
attraction and its impact relative to compensation and
opportunities for advancement. The participants were randomly assigned to read and evaluate one of eight different
advertisements. The eight advertisements were created following a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design in which a fun–work
environment was present or not, competitive compensation
was present or not, and extensive opportunities for advancement was present or not. The advertisements included a
favorable description or the absence of a favorable description of the three variables, rather than presenting either a
favorable or unfavorable description, because organizations
likely omit an unfavorable description in their formal
recruiting materials. After reading the advertisement, the
participants responded to a series of questions regarding their attraction to the job and the organization.
Approximately 47 individuals were assigned to each scenario. The descriptions of the three variables are presented
in Appendix A.
Manipulation check. The goal of the first scenario was to
determine the relative impact of high levels of fun, compensation, and opportunities for advancement on applicant
attraction. Thus, prior to presenting the scenarios to the participants, a manipulation check was conducted to verify that
the descriptions of the variables were perceived as relatively high and that the perceptions of the descriptions were
approximately equivalent. Thirty-two industrial and organizational psychology graduate students rated the extent to
which they agreed that each description was favorable with
a 5-point scale with anchors ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The mean ratings for the fun,
compensation, and opportunities for advancement were 4.44,
4.53, and 4.34, respectively. These ratings were relatively
high, as they were all more than 4.00. There were no significant differences in the ratings for the three descriptions.
Dependent variables. Three variables were used to assess
applicant attraction—perceived fun, perceived person–
organization fit, and job pursuit intentions. Three items,
developed specifically for this study, were used to assess
perceived fun. A sample item includes “This would be a fun
place to work.” The participants responded using a 5-point
scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree. Three items from Cable and Judge (1996) were used
to assess perceived person–organization fit. A sample item
includes “To what extent do you feel your values fit this
organization?” The participants responded using a 5-point
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at SAN JOSE STATE UNIV on November 25, 2015
109
Tews et al.
scale ranging from 1 = not at all to 5 = completely. Saks,
Leck, and Saunders’s (1995) two-item scale was used to
measure job pursuit intentions. A sample item includes “If
this organization invited me for an on-site interview, I
would definitely go.” The participants responded using a
5-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 =
strongly agree. The internal consistency reliability estimates for the perceived fun, perceived person–organization fit, and job pursuit intentions scales were .86, .87, and
.94, respectively.
Scenario 2—Dimensions of Workplace Fun
To examine the impact of different aspects of workplace
fun (i.e., fun coworker interactions, fun job responsibilities,
and formal fun activities), the participants evaluated scenarios that described various events that transpired during
an on-site job interview for a desirable management trainee
position. The participants were randomly assigned to read
and evaluate one of eight different scenarios. The eight
scenarios were created following a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental
design in which coworker interactions were presented as
fun or not fun, job responsibilities were presented as fun or
not fun, and formal fun activities were presented or were
absent. Formal fun activities were presented or not presented, as opposed to presenting them either as fun or not,
because it was deemed that organizations either generally
institute such activities or not. After reading the scenario,
the participants responded to a series of questions regarding their attraction to the job and the organization.
Approximately 47 individuals were assigned to each scenario. The descriptions of the three variables are presented
in Appendix B.
Manipulation check. A manipulation check was conducted
with the same individuals as the first scenario. The manipulation check for the second scenario focused on validating
high and low differences in perceptions of fun for each variable. The respondents were presented with the descriptions
for the high and low fun conditions for each variable and
were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed that
each condition reflected a fun work environment with a
5-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 =
strongly agree. The mean differences in the high and low
conditions for each variable were statistically significant.
Dependent variables. Three variables were used to assess
applicant attraction: perceived fun, perceived person–organization fit, and offer acceptanc…
