Business periodicals, such as Fortune magazine, rank organizations in lists such as the “Best Companies to Work For,” providing applicants with information about firms' human resource practices, including pay, benefits, work‐life, and diversity practices. It is not clear what influence this reputational information about HR practices has on applicant interest in pursuing employment or, more important, why it does so. Given that firms invest substantial resources in HR practices to vie for positions on these lists, the current study sought to fill these gaps in the literature. In the 2 (compensation) × 2 (work‐family) × 2 (diversity) factorial design, 232 college students read about magazine rankings in which a firm's reputation in each HR practice was manipulated as ranking either high or low relative to competitors. We examined perceptions of organizational prestige, anticipated organizational support, and anticipated role performance as mechanisms that explain the influence of HR practice reputation on job pursuit intentions. Our results indicate that a firm's reputation in compensation, work‐family, and diversity efforts increase college students' intentions to pursue employment with a firm. They do so because college students perceive that the organization is prestigious, will be supportive, and will foster their job performance. Our results suggest that a strong employer brand derived from employee‐centered HR practices is important for recruiting college students.

Research on targeted recruitment has focused on targeting applicants with surface‐level attributes such as underrepresented demographic groups. The present study extends targeted recruitment research by examining how advertising human resource policies might be useful for targeting both surface‐ and deep‐level attributes. Specifically, the current study uses an experimental design to examine the impact of work‐family, diversity, and employee development policies on the job‐pursuit intentions of working adults in the United States. We examined surface‐ (demographic characteristics; e.g., race) and deep‐level differences (attitudes or values; e.g., diversity values) as predictors of whether participants intend to pursue jobs with firms advertising these human resource (HR) policies. Deep‐level differences consistently predicted job‐pursuit intentions for all three HR policies, but only marginal support was obtained for surface‐level variables as predictors. Findings suggest that targeted recruitment based on deep‐level attributes may be more successful than targeted recruitment based on surface‐level factors.

Research on corporate sociopolitical activism (CSA) is in its infancy, and more research is needed to examine its effects on employees. We draw from the tenets of Signaling Theory to develop and test a model of how organizations' antiracist signaling after a racial injustice event, as a form of CSA, communicates that racial justice is valued sincerely by organizations, and in turn, motivates employee commitment to diversity—both at work and in their personal lives. We also explore boundary conditions (i.e., climate for inclusion, employee race) of this relationship. We test our model with data collected from 367 employees (37.6% Black, 62.4% White) across 4‐time waves, each 1 month apart, using a mixed‐methods (quantitative and qualitative) approach. Results suggest that organizations are viewed as most sincere when they engage in signaling that includes both words (i.e., releasing a statement) and actions (e.g., hiring a diversity officer) relative to when they don't engage in these words and/or actions. Moreover, when organizations signaled a sincere commitment to antiracism with both words and actions, employees were more committed to diversity at work and in their personal lives, though actions taken by the organization were especially important. Moreover, a strong climate for inclusion reduced the need for actions, while a weak climate for inclusion increased the need for a statement. Theoretical, research, and practical implications are discussed.

Drawing from resource‐based theories, we conduct two studies to investigate the unique and relative importance of personal (e.g., resilience, proactive health behaviors), work, and family resources (i.e., enriched job and family roles, work and family support) to balance satisfaction, and the mediating roles of conflict and enrichment. We test our hypotheses in Study 1 using a cross‐sectional survey of 216 employees and in Study 2 using a time‐lagged survey over 3 months with 220 employees. Across both studies, work and family resources (e.g., enriched job and family characteristics, work and family support) were positively related to balance satisfaction. In general, work resources were more relevant to balance satisfaction than were personal or family resources. In terms of processes, work resources relate to less work‐to‐family conflict and greater work‐to‐family enrichment which in turn, relate to greater balance. In contrast, the family‐to‐work directions of conflict and enrichment were just weakly related to balance. Across the two studies, findings regarding the role of personal resources were mixed. We discuss how these findings expand our understanding of work–family balance and the practical implications for human resource practitioners.