Engagement, procedural fairness, and perceived fit as predictors of applicant withdrawal intentions: A longitudinal field study

Abstract

The current study draws upon image theory to identify predictors of applicant withdrawal intentions and behavior. Applicants from a U.S. manufacturing organization completed measures of engagement, procedural justice, perceived fit, offer expectancy, perceived alternatives, and withdrawal intentions. Results indicate that withdrawal intentions were lower when candidates were more engaged in the selection process, perceived a higher level of procedural justice in the application process, perceived a greater degree of fit, and had higher offer expectancies. Additionally, the person–job fit–withdrawal intentions relationship was moderated by perceived alternatives such that this relationship was strongest when candidates reported having more alternatives. Withdrawal behavior was significantly predicted by person–organization fit, engagement, and withdrawal intentions. These results suggest that withdrawal intentions may be reduced via the development of engaging and procedurally fair selection procedures that help candidates determine their fit with the job and the organization.

Age Diversity Climate Affecting Individual-Level Work-Related Outcomes

“…Participants’ perceived fit with their job and organization have been suggested to predict increased work engagement and reduced intentions to quit [ 49 , 50 ]. Perceived fit was assessed using two single items from Giumetti and Raymark [ 51 ], respectively: “Describe your overall level of fit with the job position. That is, how well do the requirements and tasks of the job seem to match with your knowledge, skills, and abilities?” and “Describe your overall level of fit with this organization.…”

An examination of the relationship between applicant race and accrued recruitment source information: Implications for applicant withdrawal and test performance

“…Applicant withdrawal (Ryan et al, 2000) occurs when candidates apply for positions but then drop out before they undergo the required selection tests. Applicants who are strongly attracted to jobs have a stronger desire to be hired and are thus more likely to remain in the applicant pool (Giumetti & Raymark, 2017;Griepentrog, Harold, Holtz, Klimoski, & Marsh, 2012).…”

A systematic review of temporal person‐environment fit research: Trends, developments, obstacles, and opportunities for future research

“…For instance, Swider et al (2015) show that job applicants increasingly differentiate between employers based on their changing perceptions of person‐organization (PO) fit. More broadly, fit, and especially PO fit, has been found to become more predictive of attraction and withdrawal effects further down into the recruitment and hiring process, both from a recruiter (Chuang & Sackett, 2005) and applicant (Carless, 2005; Giumetti & Raymark, 2017) point of view. In addition, Breeden (1993) reports that those who changed jobs or occupations displayed higher levels of abilities and interest fit compared to nonchangers at follow‐up 2 years later.…”

“…Ghetta et al (2020) Change in PV fit was not related to simultaneous or subsequent change in job satisfaction, or vice versa. Giumetti and Raymark (2017) The importance of PO and PJ fit perceptions in predicting selection withdrawal intensions increases throughout the selection process. In turn, withdrawal intensions were lower when candidates perceived a greater degree of fit.…”

“…Four storylines were revealed that capture variation in the evolution in this process over time: exploring opportunities, solving problems, reconciling incongruence, and escaping situations. predictive of attraction and withdrawal effects further down into the recruitment and hiring process, both from a recruiter (Chuang & Sackett, 2005) and applicant (Carless, 2005;Giumetti & Raymark, 2017) point of view. In addition, Breeden (1993) reports that those who changed jobs or occupations displayed higher levels of abilities and interest fit compared to nonchangers at follow-up 2 years later.…”