An Evaluation of a Perceived Overqualification Scale Across Work Settings

Abstract

The authors extended and evaluated the dimensionality of the L. J. Khan and P. C. Morrow (1991) subjective underemployment scale. They used data from 3 independent samples to assess the measurement properties of the scale. The results of confirmatory factor analyses supported 2 dimensions and indicated that the measurement model parameters partially generalized across samples. Correlational and additional confirmatory factor analytic results rendered empirical support for most of the postulated relationships of the 2 overqualification dimensions with the somatization, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment variables. The findings indicate that the scale of perceived overqualification needs to be further developed and validated in different samples. The implications of the findings for person-job fit are discussed.

On the association between perceived overqualification and adaptive behavior

“…We measured perceived overqualification with a fouritem scale (Johnson et al, 2002). It assesses employees' perceptions about whether one's qualifications exceeded those required by the job at hand (e.g., 'My formal education overqualifies me for my present job;' α = .87).…”

A influência da Sobrequalificação e da Aprendizagem sobre a Satisfação do Indivíduo no Trabalho

“…In the overqualification school of thought, the Relative Deprivation Theory defends that the objective situation of individuals is rarely sufficient to explain how they feel and behave in the work environment, as individual reactions in relation to a given situation depend on subjective assessments (FELDMAN, LEANA, BOLINO, 2002;JOHNSON, MORROW, JOHNSON, 2002).…”

“…3 8 7 ) , "overqualification can be considered as part of a wider definition of the sub-employment term, i.e., a situation of lower quality job in comparison with some standard job." While this argument seems to be extreme at first, and other variables to be considered are recognized, many of such variables are frequently treated as synonyms or with hardly any difference between them (SMITH, 1986;JOHNSON, MORROW, JOHNSON, 2002).…”

“…Main effect variables (i.e., overqualification, exploration learning, exploitation learning) and dependent variable (satisfaction) comprised multiple indicators in a five-point Likert scale. Overqualification was assessed by four indicators used by Johnson, Morrow and Johnson (2002) for the Perceived Mismatch dimension, and the organizational learning scale at the individual level was prepared based on six indicators for each definition of exploration and exploitation found in the literature (GUPTA, SMITH, SHALLEY, 2006;HE, WONG, 2004;LEVINTHAL, MARCH, 1993;MARCH, 1991). The dependent variable (satisfaction) was measured base on the five indicators proposed by Brayfield and Rothe (1951).…”

“…While some researchers defend that negative attitudes in the workplace are related to qualifications perceived that exceed job requirements (BURRIS, 1983;JOHNSON, MORROW, JOHNSON, 2002;MAYNARD, JOSEPH, MAYNARD, 2006), others defend that those employees who perceive themselves as overqualified, although being more likely to leave the job, have better performance as their supervisors see it.…”