JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, VOL. 15, 549-560 (1994)

Presence of drug screening and employeeassistance programs: exclusive and inclusivehuman resource management practices

NATHAN BENNETTLouisiana State University

TERRY C. BLUMGeorgia Institute of Technoiogy

AND

PAUL M. ROMANUniversity of Georgia

Summary Drug screening and employee assistance programs (EAPs) are human resource manage-ment practices for addressing substance abuse among employees. The two practicesreflect different human resource management strategies and lead to different outcomesfor employees and applicants. Drug screening is designed to exclude drug users fromthe workplace whereas EAPs offer them 'rehabilitation'. Characteristics of worksitesand their surrounding labor market may influence the presence or absence of thesepersonnel practices. The results suggest that, when controlling for number of employees,economic sector, industry, and union presence, worksites with low turnover and inareas with high unemployment rates are more likely to engage in pre-employment drugscreening, while worksites with low turnover more often provide an EAP.

Introduction

There are distinct variations in human resource management practices across American work-places. These variations likely reflect different strategies that may or may not be part of deliberateplanning and likely have important linkages to organizational culture and employee welfare.There is, however, minimal empirical research that examines the correlates of human resourcemanagement practices. Notable exceptions are macrolevel examinations of the emergence ofcontemporary personnel management (Baron, Dobbin and Jennings, 1986), specific personnelsystems (Baron, Jennings and Dobbin, 1988), gender integration (Baron, Mittman and Newman,1991), and procedures for assuring due process for employees (Dobbin, Edelman, Meyer, Scott

The authors would like to acknowledge support from National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism grantROl-AA-07192 and National Institute on Drug Abuse grants ROl-DA-07417 and R29-DA-07712. The first authorwould like to acknowledge additional support from an LSU University Council for Research Summer Grant. Anearlier version of this paper was presented at the 1990 Academy of Management Meeting. Address all correspondenceto the first author. Department of Management, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, U.S.A.

CCC 0894-3796/94/060549-12 Received 26 April 1993© 1994 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 17 January 1994

550 N. BENNETT, T. C. BLUM AND P. M. ROMAN

and Swidler, 1988). Missing from these examinations are firm-level data from representativesamples of workplaces. As one of the leaditig groups in the emerging research area has pointedout, 'there appears to be a wide range of equally viable systems for structuring employmentwithin a given organizational form. We need to know much more about how workers (andfirms) react over time to these alternatives for organizing personnel' (Baron et al., 1988, p.512, emphasis added). This paper responds to this suggestion using as its focus two humanresource management programs designed to address employee substance abuse.

Reflection on events of the past two decades clearly indicates that drug abuse was definedby leadership in both government and the private sector as a severe menace to social order.More specifically, drug users were characterized as uninhibited, unpredictable, dangerous tothemselves and others, prone to criminal activity, and detriments to productivity in the workplace(Roman and Blum, 1992). Publicity about drug abuse among employed persons encouragedemployers to perceive a 'crisis of control' and to take deliberate action to protect their organiza-tions against the drug abuse menace (Trice and Roman, 1978). Institutional theory (e.g. DiMag-gio and Powell, 1983; Meyer and Rowan, 1977; Zucker, 1987) would suggest that such awidespread and negative cultural reaction to drug problems would create pressure resultingin a fairly uniform stance on the part of employers.

A sociological perspective on human resource management, however (e.g. Baron et al., 1986,1988, 1991; Dobbin et al., 1988), would predict that labor market and organizational characteris-tics will affect the presence of different practices addressing drugs in the workplace. Two suchpractices are pre-employment drug screening (PEDS) and employee assistance programs (EAP).We argue that these practices reflect different managerial strategies for containing the effectsof environmental intrusions which enter via the human component of production (Blum, 1989;Blum and Roman, 1989). Further, features of both labor markets and workplaces provideopportunities and constraints that affect adoption of these human resource managementpractices.

PEDS represents an exclusive strategy designed to preclude hiring individuals with characteris-tics viewed as undesirable, in this instance persons whose test results indicate the use of illegaldrugs. By contrast, EAPs represent an inclusive strategy wherein organizations undertake toalter or correct employees' undesirable features. This offering of assistance provides opportuni-ties for managers to forestall discipline or dismissal of employees with personal problems con-tingent upon their ability to constructively address personal issues that negatively affect jobperformance.

As is true of other aspects of human resource management, the implementation of thesepractices may reflect labor market conditions (e.g. Kossek, 1987). For example, the availabilityof labor can be one aspect of the munificence of an organization's environment (cf. Castrogio-vanni, 1991). In essence, managers in a munificent labor market may perceive hiring opportunitiesto be broad enough to allow for excluding prospective employees whose lifestyles they findoffensive even if those behaviors (i.e. use of illegal drugs) may not be predictive ofjob performanceproblems. In a less munificent environment, replacement may be difficult and costly in contrastto attempts to conserve troubled individuals' employment. Thus, labor market conditions arehypothesized to be associated with the presence of these different practices.

Pre-employment drug screening

Empirical research on drug testing has been largely descriptive, focusing on its effects on indivi-dual attitudes towards potential employers (e.g. Crant and Bateman, 1990; Murphy, Thorntonand Reynolds, 1990), its utility as a selection device (e.g. Normand, Salyards and Mahoney,

PRESENCE OF EAP AND DRUG SCREENING 551

1990; Parish, 1989; Zwerling, Ryan and Orav, 1990), and its prevalence (e.g. United StatesDepartment of Labor [DOL], 1989). An extensive program prevalence study conducted in 1988used a sample of 7502 private sector, non-agricultural establishments (92.4 per cent responserate), of which 3.2 per cent reported the presence of some type of drug testing program (DOL,1989). The presence of a drug testing program was found to be positively associated with thesize of the establishment. While less than 1 per cent of the establishments with fewer than10 employees had drug testing programs, the percentage increased steadily with worksite size,with 59.8 per cent of the establishments with 5000 or more employees engaged in some typeof drug testing. Overall, the DOL (1989) study reports that 19.6 per cent of all employeesworked at sites that had some type of drug testing program in 1988.

Despite the continuing debate over the legal and ethical implications of drug testing, thecurrent trend points to an expanding use of such tests, with 3.9 per cent of establishmentssurveyed in the DOL study reported to be considering the adoption of a drug screening program.The percentage considering adoption of drug testing increases to between 10 and 15 per centfor those establishments in the size categories with 50 or more employees (DOL, 1989). Propo-nents of pre-employment drug tests hold that their technology detects serious drug users andkeeps them out of the workplace. Also, it is believed that a significant number of drug users,fearing detection, are deterred from applying for jobs in organizations that are known to screenapplicants for evidence of drug use (Gust and Walsh, 1989).

In regard to employee reactions to drug testing, Crant and Bateman (1990) found that thepresence of pre-employment screening and testing of current employees in an hypothetical com-pany led their sample of college students to have less positive attitudes toward a potentialjob in that company, and to be less likely to apply for a job there. Similarly, Murphy et al.(1990) found that while drug testing was viewed positively under some circumstances, therewas wide variability in attitudes. Further, there did not seem to be a predictable pattern ofvariables associated with either a favorable or unfavorable opinion of drug testing. The resultsof each of these studies suggest that the presence of drug testing may create some differentforms of hesitancy to apply for a job on the part of individuals seeking employment, an attitudeat least partially independent of their actual drug use.

From a human resource management standpoint, the main implication of pre-employmentdrug testing is that a smaller pool of applicants will be considered suitable for employment.This can occur in two ways. First, a worksite's drug testing policy may have an impact onan individual's likelihood of applying for a job whether or not the person has used drugs(e.g. Crant and Bateman, 1990; Murphy et al., 1990; Schwab, Rynes and Aldag, 1987). Inthis vein, it has been suggested that those applicants who are most qualified will have morejob options and hence greater ability to avoid any particular worksite whose human resourcepolicies are objectionable (Murphy, 1986). Second, the number of otherwise qualified applicantsis reduced by the number that test positive for a prohibited substance. Although positive ratesare now decreasing, studies that tested samples ofjob applicants during the late 1980s (whenthese data were collected) found that roughly 10 to 12 per cent tested positive for illicit drugs(Normand et al., 1990; Zwerling et al., 1990). This suggests that the implementation of pre-employment testing could cause staffing difficulties in some settings. For worksites in tightlabor markets, the practice further limits the number ofjob candidates from which to select.In fact, Blum (1989) reported one case where labor supply was so critical that those who testedpositive but met other criteria for employment were hired and warned to stop their drug use.Thus, we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 1: Worksites with a munificent labor market will be more likely to engagein pre-employment drug testing than those in labor markets characterized by scarcity.

552 N. BENNETT, T. C. BLUM AND P. M. ROMAN

Employee assistance programs

EAPs are oriented to conserving employment of current workers (Steele, 1989). In companieswith EAPs, employees who exhibit a job performance decrement that cannot be attributedto workplace causes (such as inadequate training or inappropriate equipment) can be referredto the EAP where they are offered assistance in altering problematic behaviors, including sub-stance abuse (Blum and Roman, 1989; Beyer and Trice, 1984). Thus, EAPs serve performancemanagement and employment conservation functions that are both cost-effective and humanein providing assistance to an employee with an alcohol, drug, or other personal problem (McCaf-fery, 1988; Scarpello and Ledvinka, 1988). EAPs are more prevalent than drug testing, andtheir presence has also been associated with worksite size. The Department of Labor surveyreports that 4.2 per cent of those sites with less than 10 employees offer an EAP, in contrastto 67.6 per cent of those with more than 5000 employees (DOL, 1989). For each of the DOLsize categories between 10 and 5000 employees, EAPs have been adopted by approximately50 per cent more worksites than drug testing. Approximately 50 per cent of all U.S. employeeshave access to an EAP (Blum and Roman, 1989; Blum, Martin and Roman, 1992).

A manifest goal of EAPs is to retain organizations' investments in individuals by returningto work rather than firing or otherwise 'losing' employees and incurring replacement costsof hiring and training (Blum and Roman, 1989). Turnover and labor market conditions shouldaffect the priority of these concerns. For example, a worksite with high turnover may notwish to invest money in the rehabilitation of employees who are likely to have short tenures.Conversely, if the supply of labor is critical, worksite management might prefer to absorbcosts associated with an employee's rehabilitation, rather than the costs and possibly the risksassociated with replacement. These scenarios describe labor market contingencies affectingemployers' willingness to invest to conserve employment relationships. Thus, we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 2: Worksites faced with scarcity in the labor market are more likely than thosein munificent labor markets to have an employee assistance program.

Control variables

Previous research indicates that both pre-employment drug screening and employee assistanceprograms are not randomly distributed across workplaces. As a result, our analyses controlfor four variables previous researchers have found to be correlated with the presence of drugtesting and/or EAPs.

First, previous research has consistently shown that EAPs are more prevalent in larger firms(DOL, 1989; Gomez-Mejia and Balkin, 1987; Roman, 1982). Generally, large size is associatedwith early adoption of a variety of programs (e.g. Tolbert and Zucker, 1983) and with qualityof employee benefits (e.g. Villemez and Bridges, 1988), of which EAPs are an example.

Second, a typology developed in the sociological literature has bearing on human resourcepolicies and practices, the distinction between 'core' and 'peripheral' sectors of the economy(e.g. Baron and Bielby, 1980; Tolbert, 1980). The core sector consists of powerful oligopolisticcorporations that grew to dominate the U.S. economy in the late nineteenth and early twentiethcenturies. In contrast, the periphery is characterized by much smaller firms operating in a rela-tively competitive environment. Workers who are able to secure employment in the core economycan theoretically be assured of an advantage over their counterparts in the periphery (Edwards,Reich and Gordon, 1975). For example, core firms make a greater investment in training andthe maintenance of internal labor markets for jobs, and hence have an interest in retainingemployees (Bluestone, Murphy and Stevenson, 1973). This description ofthe core sector contrasts

PRESENCE OF EAP AND DRUG SCREENING 553

with that of the economic periphery (cf. Granovetter, 1984), where employment is characterizedby general and easily transferable skills, little employer investment in training, and high turnover(Edwards, 1979). The vulnerable character of the employment relationship in the economicperiphery, contrasted with that in the core, has led to the suggestion that EAPs will morelikely be present in firms in the core economic sector (Steele, 1989).

Third, research has found that drug testing is more prevalent in transportation and manufac-turing settings where risks of drug-related accidents and injuries are perceived to be greater(Gomez-Mejia and Balkin, 1987; Masters, Ferris and Ratcliff, 1988; Mellow, 1988). Fourth,it has been shown (Kemp, 1989) that unions are actively involved in negotiating for employeeassistance programs. In the case of the various types of drug testing, the role of unions varies.As examples, LeRoy (1991) reports strong union member support of drug testing based largelyon concerns for a safe workplace. By contrast, Irwin (1990) concludes that there is strongunion opposition to drug testing, which is seen as a management tool for control of employees.

Based on the research outlined above, the number of employees, whether the firm is locatedin the core or peripheral economic sector, industry type and union presence are included inthe analyses as controls in our investigation of the role that labor market factors have in explain-ing the presence of EAPs and PEDS.

Method

Sample and data collectionThe data for this analysis were collected during 1988 from a sample of human resource managersat worksites in Georgia as part of a larger study of the human resource management function'.A population frame of private sector (for profit, non-public) worksites with 250 or moreemployees was constructed from the Dun's Marketing Identifiers file (DMI). This sourcehas been found to be a superior sampling frame as compared to other available lists (Kalleberg,Marsden, Aldrich and Cassell, 1990).

To further enhance the accuracy of the sampling frame, the Georgia Manufacturing Directoryand Chamber of Commerce lists provided by each of the 159 counties in the state were usedto supplement the DMI file. Companies were grouped into three geographical categories; thoselocated in the 18 county Atlanta Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA)", those locatedin one of the state's seven other SMSAs, or those located outside an SMSA. Each group, wassampled based on the state's population distribution with a target TV of 300. For example,approximately one-half of the state's population resides in the Atlanta SMSA, so 150 of the300 companies were drawn from the Atlanta group. Once selected for inclusion in the sample,

' The timing of the data collection is important to note. The data were collected before government regulation thatmay have spurred drug testing was in place. The Department of Transportation regulations on pre-employment, random,and for-cause testing have been in place since November of 1991. The Department of Defense regulation becameenforceable in 1988, but only required random drug testing. The Drug Free Workplace Act, which itself does notrequire screening, per sc, had not yet been implemented. While some worksites may have anticipated these regulations,the number ultimately effected is small and we feel it is reasonable to conclude that, at the time of the data collection,the decision whether or not to engage in pre-employment drug testing rested with the worksite. In fact, respondentswere asked where the impetus for the decision to engage in PEDS and EAP originated and none mentioned thateither was in response to regulation.• Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) is a term used by the U.S. Bureau of the Census to define 'a largepopulation nucleus combined with nearby communities which have a high degree of economic and social integrationwithin that nucleus' (Garwood and Hornor, 1991, pp. 211-212). The area is defined beginning with an urban center(city) and working outward to the surrounding urbanized area and additional outlying areas that meet various criteriain regard to factors such as commuting ties to the central city. The reader is referred to Garwood and Hornor (1991)for more detail on this issue.

554 N. BENNETT, T. C. BLUM AND P. M. ROMAN

human resource departments were contacted to verify the number ofemployees at the location.Worksites that were verified to have fewer than 250 employees or could not be located werereplaced in the sample by an organization with a similar reported size and standard industrialclassification code. Ultimately, 343 eligible worksites were contacted in order to conduct 297interviews, yielding a participation rate of 86.3 per cent. Interviews were conducted with thehighest ranking human resource official available at each site.

Measures

Dependent variablesThe presence of the two personnel practices of interest was determined through the interviewand are dummy coded (0, 1) such that a one indicates that the company: (1) engages in pre-employment drug screening {N = 149; 50 per cent); (2) offers an employee assistance program(A' = 161; 54 per cent)\ It should be noted that these categories are not mutually exclusive.Table 1 presents a cross-tabulation that illustrates how these practices are distributed in thefocal sample.

Table 1. Distribution of inclusive and exclusive practices in the focal sample

Employeeassistance

program

Present

Absent

Pre-employment drug screenmgPresent Absent

Comprehensive

Celll

Exclusive

CelU

Inclusive

No program

Cell 2

Cell 3

Total

161

136

Total 149 148

Independent variablesThere are six independent variables included in the analysis. Three variables based on workby Gomez-Mejia and Balkin (1987) are used to measure organizational characteristics. Industryis based on two digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code classifications. These codesare used to classify industries on the basis of the type of activity in which they are engaged(Garwood and Hornor, 1991). In these analyses, the SIC codes have been combined to reflecta manufacturing and transportation (A' = 171)/non-manufacturing and non-transportation (A= 124) dichotomy. The number of employees at the worksite and the presence of a union (26per cent) are based on the report of the human resource manager at the worksite. Additionally,the four digit codes were used to categorize the worksite as belonging to either the core

We do not address the issue of random drug testing of current employees or for-cause testing in this paper. Randomtesting was excluded because its actual prevalence was too low to sustain an analysis (4 per cent of the sample hadrandom drug testing policies, with even fewer currently engaging in the practice). For-cause testing is an interestingcase, because it is heterogeneous in terms of its representation of inclusive or exclusive human resource strategies.In analyses not reported, we found that labor market characteristics were not associated with the presence of for-causetesting, and further, that they were not associated with whether the result of a positive for-cause test was dismissalor referral to a help source, such as an EAP. In other words, the decision to use for-cause testing as either an exclusiveor inclusive strategy was not influenced by labor market or organizational characteristics included in this analysis.

PRESENCE OF EAP AND DRUG SCREENING 555

{N = 175) or periphery {N = 122) economic sector as suggested by Beck, Horan and Tolbert(1978).

Two variables are included in the analysis to characterize labor market munificence. First,the unemployment rate for the area in which the firm is located was collected from archivalsources (Georgia County Data Guide, 1990). We have defined the labor market as the countyin which the site was located as well as all contiguous counties. An unemployment rate wascalculated for each worksite for the labor market area. In order to account for any short-termfluctuations in the unemployment rate, the mean rate for three years (1986-1988) was usedin the analysis. Second, the site's annual turnover rate was collected in the interview and ismeasured as the percentage ofemployees replaced by the firm in the past 12 months. Turnoveris considered in conjunction with unemployment rate because it indicates the degree to whichthe worksite has to search the outside community for replacement labor. In other words, work-sites with high turnover operating in munificent labor markets do not face the same constraintson decision making regarding human resource practices as those sites in areas where laboris scarce.

Analyses

A correlation matrix including descriptive statistics for all study variables is presented in theAppendix. Both number ofemployees and annual turnover were logged using a natural transfor-mation to correct for skewness in their distributions.

To test the hypotheses, two logistic regressions were performed. The dependent variablesin these analyses were whether the company had adopted, first, an exclusionary practice (PEDS),and second, an inclusive practice (EAP). In other words, the first equation considers the likeli-hood that a company will be in cell 1 or cell 4 of Table 1 versus cell 2 or cell 3. The secondequation considers the likelihood that a company will be in cell 1 or 2, as compared to cells3 and 4. The results of these analyses are presented in Table 2.

Since the coding of the dependent variables in Table 2 allows those companies with bothpractices to be considered in both equations, a second, more restrictive, test is presented inTable 3. In these analyses, the equations consider the likelihood of a company being in (a)cell 4 compared to cell 1; and (b) cell 2 compared to cell 1. That is, the results in Table 3compare companies with only an inclusive or only an exclusive strategy with companies thathave adopted both practices.

Results

To consider the two labor market variables simultaneously, to control for size, economic sector,industry and union presence, two logistic regressions testing the hypotheses are presented inTable 2. The first hypothesis stated that pre-employment drug screening would be more prevalentin worksites operating in a munificent labor market. In support of the hypotheses, the logisticregressions show that a low rate of turnover and high area unemployment are both relatedto the presence of PEDS, even when controlling for size, economic sector, industry, and unionpresence. The second hypothesis stated that worksites operating in a tight labor market wouldbe more likely to provide employee assistance programs. While unemployment was not relatedto EAP presence, worksites with low turnover were more likely to support EAPs.

Since EAPs and pre-employment drug screening are not mutually exclusive practices, a seriesof logistic regressions were conducted to explore factors associated with the adoption of only

556 N. BENNETT, T. C. BLUM AND P. M. ROMAN

Table 2. Logistic regression analysis comparing all companies with either inclusive or exclusive practicesto all other companies

Control variablesSizeEconomic sectorIndustryUnion

Independent variablesTurnoverUnemployment

Model x

DependentExclusive practice

b

0.160.381.23t0.34

-0.27*0.391

56.92t

SE

0.170.310.310.34

0.120.16

variablesInclusive

b

0.40*0.59*

-0.23-0.17

-0.47t-0.04

39.49t

practiceSE

0.190.290.310.33

0.120.15

n = 264. One-tailed tests of significance are reported. * p < 0.05, t P < 001, t p < 0.01.

Table 3. Logistic regression analysis comparing worksites with only inclusive or exclusive practices tothose with both

Dependant variablesExclusive practice Inclusive practice

(n=136) (n=145)b SE b SE

Control variablesSizeEconomic sectorIndustryUnion

Independent variablesTurnoverUnemployment

Model X'

-0 .41*-0.21

0.77*-0.18

0.36$0.12

13.38$

0.260.430.490.45

0.180.20

-0.06-0.23

I.22t-0.89*

0.01-0.37*

25.66§

0.240.450.440.49

0.180.21

One-tailed tests of significance are reported.* / )<o . io , t / ' <om.ip < 0.05,1/) < 0.001.

the inclusive or exclusive practice. In these analyses, worksites with only PEDS or only EAPare compared with worksites that have adopted both practices. Results are presented in Table3. Again controlling for size, econotnic sector, industry, and union, the results show that firmswith high turnover are more likely to have adopted only PEDS, while worksites in areas oflow unemployment are more likely to have adopted only an EAP.

Discussion

These analyses suggest that organizational and labor market characteristics are related to thepresence of inclusive and exclusive human resource management strategies adopted to addressemployee drug use. The data show that in addition to an industry economic sector and worksiteeffects, labor market characteristics add explanation to our understanding of which substanceabuse-related strategies are more likely to be present. Specifically sites with low turnover and

PRESENCE OF EAP AND DRUG SCREENING 557

a greater labor supply are more likely to adopt an exclusive strategy reflected by the practiceof screening job applicants for evidence of drug use. This situation reflects a munificent labormarket in which managers have greater latitude in their use of selection devices to meet hiringneeds and to implement their own theories of the patterns of worker qualifications most suitedto productive employment. This finding is also consistent with the observation of Baron etal. (1986) that paper and pencil testing of prospective employees diffused more slowly thanother personnel practices during World War II 'no doubt because employers lowered hiringstandards amid increasing labor scarcity during the war' (p. 361).

The finding that union presence is unrelated to any of the three practices is interesting andalso suggests alternative explanations. It may be that since the sample was drawn from companiesin a right-to-work state, union influence over human resource management practices is lesspronounced. Alternatively, the role of union presence may be statistically diminished becauseof its association with the other worksite and labor market variables included in the analyses.

Firms with high turnover are more likely to have adopted PEDS while workplaces in areasof low unemployment are more likely to have adopted only an EAP. There are at least twopossible interpretations ofthese results. Worksites with high rates of turnover may be unwillingto provide the investment in employees that an EAP could entail because employees will notstay long enough to provide a return on investment. These worksites are also less likely touse exclusive selection practices such as pre-employment drug screening. Management in theseorganizations may not view testing applications who are expected to have a short tenure ascost-effective. In both cases, the motivation for management to make an investment in theircurrent or potential employees is low. An alternative explanation is that because of the outcomesEAPs provide through conservation of employment relationships, worksites with EAPs havelower turnover. It also may be that those that have used selection tools such as PEDS havelower turnover. The finding that worksites with low turnover in the core economic sector aremore likely to have an EAP supports both of these explanations, as firms in the core arecharacterized by higher levels of employer investment in employee benefits and by a greateremphasis on employee retention (e.g. Bluestone et al., 1973).

The analyses comparing worksites with either practice in place to those with both also supportsour argument that labor market conditions affect the presence of these programs. Worksiteswith high turnover were more likely to rely on PEDS alone as a method to address employeesubstance abuse. This, of course, leads to the companion finding that worksites with low turnoverare more likely to have adopted both practices. Low turnover suggests that employees arelikely to remain at a site for some time making the investment made in selection (PEDS) andconservation (EAP) cost-beneficial. Those worksites providing EAP but not engaging in PEDSwere located in areas with low unemployment. A tight labor market would suggest this configu-ration since it does not exclude applicants to begin with and also provides for employee conser-vation.

Two limitations to the present study should be acknowledged both to add caution to ourinterpretation of these results and to guide future research. First, we were unable to examinecausal relationships between either labor market variables and PEDS and EAPs or amongthe independent and control variables, due to the cross-sectional nature of our data. Futureresearch to better model the relationships between organizational characteristics, labor marketcharacteristics, and human resource management practices is clearly warranted. Second, oursample was limited to worksites with at least 250 employees. While this places a limit on thegeneralizability of our results, it is worth repeating the DOI (1989) study, which found bothEAPs and PEDS to be much more infrequent in smaller companies, particularly those withless than 100 employees. Research to investigate the role of labor market variables in explaining

558 N. BENNETT, T. C. BLUM AND P. M. ROMAN

human resource management practices in smaller worksites may find a different pattern ofresults.

It is crucial for human resource management strategies to make explicit the underlying concep-tual differences between the practices of pre-employment drug testing and employee assistance,since their common emphases on substance abuse set the stage for confusion. Understandingthe factors associated with the presence of these practices is also important, as it has implicationsfor who gets and who keeps jobs.

Appendix—Means, standard deviations, and correlations for all studyvariables

1. EAP2. PEDS3. Turnover4. Unemployment5. Size6. Economic sector7. Industry8. Union

X

0.540.57

32.765.45

737.490.580.580.25

S.D.

0.490.50

53.290.98

817.650.490.490.43

1

1.000.15

-0.23-0.02

0.150.260.000.04

2

1.00-0.23

0.240.100.090.380.21

3

1.00-0.04-0.12-0.31-0.24-0.03

4

1.00-0.01-0.11

0.270.10

5

1.000.110.050.12

6

1.00-0.05

0.16

7

1.000.21

8

1.00

ReferencesBaron, J. N. and Bielby, W. T. (1980). 'Bringing the firm back in: Stratification, segmentation, and the

organization of work', American Sociological Review, 45, 737-765.Baron, J. N., Jennings, P. D. and Dobbin, F. R. (1988). 'Mission control? The development of personnel

systems in U.S. industry', American Sociological Review, 53, 497-514.Baron, J. N., Dobbin, F. R. and Jennings, P. D. (1986). 'War and peace: The evolution of modern

personnel administration in U.S. industry', American Journal of Sociology, 96, 350-383.Baron, J. N., Mittman, B. S. and Newman, A. E. (1991). 'Targets of opportunity: Organizational and

environmental determinants of gender integration within the California civil service, 1979-1985', Ameri-can Journal of Sociology, 96, 1362-1401.

Beck, E. M., Horan, P. M. and Tolbert, C. M. (1978). 'Stratification in a dual economy: A sectoralmodel of earnings determination', American Sociological Review, 43, 704-720.

Beyer, J. M. and Trice, H. M. (1984). 'A field study of the use and perceived effects of discipline incontrolling work performance'. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 743-764.

Bluestone, B., Murphy, W. M. and Stevenson, M. (1973). Low Wages and the Working Poor, ILR, Universityof Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Blum, T. C. (1989). 'The presence and integration of drug abuse intervention in human resource manage-ment'. In: Gust, S. W. and Walsh, J. M. (Eds) Drugs in the Workplace: Research and Evaluation Data,NIDA Research Monograph 91, U. S. Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Blum, T. C. and Roman, P. M. (1989). 'Employee assistance programs and human resources management'.In: Rowland, K. and Ferris, G. (Eds) Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol.7, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Blum, T. C , Martin, J. K. and Roman, P. M. (1992). 'A research note on EAP prevalence, components,and utilization'. Journal of Employee Assistance Research, 1, 209-229.

Castrogiovanni, G. J. (1991). 'Environmental munificence: A theoretical assessment'. Academy of Manage-ment Review, 16, 542-565.

Crant, J. M. and Bateman, T. S. (1990). 'An experimental test of the impact of drug-testing programson potential job applicants attitudes and intentions'. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 127-131.

PRESENCE OF EAP AND DRUG SCREENING 559

DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1983). 'The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collectiverationality in organizational fields', American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.

Dobbin, F. R., Edelman, L., Meyer, J. W., Scott, W. R. and Swidler, A. (1988). 'The expansion ofdue process in organizations'. In: Zucker, L. G. (Ed.) Institutional Patterns and Organization: Cultureand Environment, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.

Edwards, R. C. (1979). Contested Terrain, Basic, New York.Edwards, R. C , Reich, M. and Gordon, D. M. (1975). Labor Market Segmentation, Heath, Lexington,

MA.Garwood, A. N. and Hornor, L. L. (Eds) (1991). Dictionary of U.S. Government Statistical Terms, Infor-

mation Publications, Palo Alto, CA.Georgia County Data Guide (1990). The University of Georgia, Cooperative Extension Service, Athens,

GA.Gomez-Mejia, L. K. and Balkin, D. B. (1987). 'Dimensions and characteristics of personnel manager

perceptions of effective drug-testing programs'. Personnel Psychology, 40, 745-763.Granovetter, M. S. (1984). 'Small is bountiful: Labor markets and establishment size', >4/nencan 5oc(otog^(ca/

Review, 49, 323-334.Guest, S. W. and Walsh, J. M. (1989). 'Research on the prevalence, impact, and treatment of drug abuse

in the workplace'. In: Gust, S. W. and Walsh, J. M. (Eds) Drugs in the Workplace: Research andEvaluation Data, National Institute on Drug Abuse Monograph 91, U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, Washington, DC.

Irwin, D. D. (1990). Deviance in the Workplace: Case Studies of Drug Testing in Large Organizations,Mellen Research Press, San Francisco.

Kalleberg, A. L., Marsden, P. V., Aldrich, H. E. and Cassell, J. W. (1990). 'Comparing organizationalsampling frames'. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 658-688.

Kemp, D. R. (1989). 'Major unions and collectively bargained fringe benefits'. Public Personnel Manage-ment, l», 505-510.

Kossek, E. E. (1987). 'Human resources management innovation'. Human Resources Management, 26,71-92.

LeRoy, M. R. (1991). 'Discriminating characteristics of union members' attitudes toward drug testingin the workplace'. Journal of Labor Research, 12, 452-466.

Masters, M. F., Ferris, G. R. and Ratcliff, S. L. (1988). 'Practices and attitudes of substance abusetesting'. Personnel Administrator, July, 72-78.

McCaffery, R. M. (1988). Employee Benefit Programs: A Total Compensation Perspective, PWS-Kent,Boston.

Mellow, C. (1988). 'The dope on drug testing'. Human Resource Executive, April, 34-37.Meyer, J. W. and Rowan, B. (1977). 'Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and cere-

mony', American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.Murphy, K. R. (1986). 'When your top choice turns you down: Effects of rejected job offers on selection

test utility'. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 133-138.Murphy, K. R., Thornton, G. C. and Reynolds, D. H. (1990). 'College student attitudes toward employee

drug testing programs'. Personnel Psychology, 43, 615-631.Norniand, J., Salyards, S. D. and Mahoney, J. J. (1990). 'An evaluation of Pre-Employment Drug Testing',

Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 629-639.Parish, D. C. (1989). 'Relation of pre-employment drug testing result to employment status'. Journal

of General Internal Medicine, 4, 44-47.Roman, P. M. (1982). 'Employee programs in major corporations in 1979: Scope, change, and receptivity'.

In: Prevention, Intervention and Treatment: Concerns and Models, Alcohol and Health Monograph No.3, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Roman, P. M. and Blum, T. C. (1992). 'Employee assistance and drug screening programs'. In: Gerstein,D. and Harwood, H. (Eds) Treating Drug Problems, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

Scarpello, V. G. and Ledvinka, J. (1988). Personnel/Human Resource Management: Environments andFunctions, PWS - Kent, Boston.

Schwab, D. P., Rynes, S. L. and Aldag, R. J. (1987). 'Theories and research on job search and choice'.In: Rowland, K. and Ferris, G. (Eds) Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol.5, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Steele, P. D. (1989). 'Employee assistance programs in context: An application of the constructive brokerrole'. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 24, 365-382.

560 N. BENNETT, T. C. BLUM AND P. M. ROMAN

Tolbert, C. M. (1980). 'Industrial segmentation and men's career mobility', American Sociological Review,47,457-477.

Tolbert, P. S. and Zucker, L. G. (1983). 'Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organiza-tions: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935', Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 22-39.

Trice, H. M. and Roman, P. M. (1978). Spirits and demons at work: Alcohol and other drugs on theJob. Ithaca, NY: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations.

United States Department of Labor (1989). Survey of Employer Anti-drug Programs, Report 760, U.S.Department of Labor, Bureau of Statistics, Washington, DC.

Villemez, W. J. and Bridges, W. P. (1988). 'When bigger is better: Differences in the individual-leveleffect of firm and establishment size', American Sociological Review, 53, 237-255.

Zucker, L. G. (1987). 'Institutional theories of organization'. Annual Review of Sociology, 13,443-464.Zwerling, C , Ryan, J. andOrav, E. J. (1990). 'Theefficacy of pre-employment drug screening for marijuana

and cocaine in predicting employment outcome'. Journal of the American Medical Association, 264,2639-2643.