When person‐organization (mis)fit and (dis)satisfaction lead to turnover

Abstract

PurposeThe present study examined the relationships between P‐O fit, job satisfaction, perceived job mobility, and intent to turnover. It was hypothesized that job satisfaction mediated the P‐O fit‐intent to turnover relationship and that perceived job mobility moderated the job satisfaction‐intent to turnover relationship such that the combined effect of high job dissatisfaction and high perceived job mobility predicted intent to turnover.Design/methodology/approachData were obtained utilizing a field survey from a sample of 205 full‐time employed adults working in two geographic regions in the USA. Participants completed an HTML‐based web survey that contained measures of the constructs of interest to this study.FindingsMediated and moderated regression analyses revealed statistical support for the hypothesized relationships, which were interpreted as evidence that P‐O misfit and job dissatisfaction do not necessarily lead to intent to turnover.Research limitations/implicationsThe potential for common method variability was present in the study, the impact of which could either attenuate or inflate estimated statistical relationships.Practical implicationsWhile P‐O fit researchers typically associate misfit with decreased job satisfaction and increased turnover, the present research suggests that intervening variables, such as job mobility, influence employee intentions to turnover.Originality/valueThe phenomenon of misfit is understudied in larger context of P‐O fit; thus this research represents one of the first studies in this area of research.

How an Innovative Climate can motivate an Entrepreneur

“…Feng (2011) concluded that person-organization fit (POF) is positively related to organization's innovative climate. Results match previous studies, such as Kristof-Brown et al (2005), Scott and Bruce (1994), Verquer et al (2003), Wheeler et al (2007), etc. Also, psychological climate adjustment is positivity related to organization's innovative climate as shown by Burke and Litwin (1992), Carless (2004), James and Jones (1974), Parker et al (2003), Tierney (1999).…”

“…ASA (attraction-selection attrition) theory suggests that people are interested in specific companies and jobs that suit their interest and personalities (Schneider, 1987) which draw the relationship between job criteria and decision-making process for selection towards company attractiveness (Dineen et al, 2002;Ehrhart and Ziegert, 2005). Previous studies found out that innovative climate is not easy to maintain (Kristof-Brown et al, 2005;Scott and Bruce, 1994;Verquer et al, 2003;Wheeler et al, 2007). Holland (1976) proved that there is a similarity between career environments and the people that join them.…”

Employees’ Participation in Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Person–CSR Fit

“…Subsequently, person-organization fit has been found to be an important facet within the organization-individual relationship because higher levels of fit resulted in positive organizational outcomes. Previous studies have found person-organization fit to increase positive outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and performance while decreasing detrimental outcomes such as employee deviance (e.g., [36][37][38]). …”

Linking Person-Job Fit, Person-Organization Fit, Employee Engagement and Turnover Intention: A Three-Step Conceptual Model

“…First, although both forms of fit have long been the centre of attention for organizational behaviour and industrial/organizational psychology, studies have largely focused on examining them separately (e.g., Guan, Deng, Bond, Chen, & Chan, 2010;Mostafa & Gould-Williams, 2014;Singhal & ChatterJee, 2006;Wheeler, Gallagher, Brouer, & Sablynski, 2007) rather than incorporating both types in a single model. Second, most of the available research examined the roles of the P-J fit and P-O fit in respect of various individual and organizational outcomes, such as job satisfaction (Biswas & Bhatnagar, 2013;Wheeler et al, 2007), organizational commitment (Biswas & Bhatnagar, 2013), organizational citizenship behaviour (Cable & DeRue, 2002) and turnover (Arthur et al, 2006). In doing so, most often studies investigated that how antecedents predict outcomes.…”