curvilinearity; demands-abilities fit; needs-supply fit; person-environment fit; person-organisation fit; too-much-of-a-good-thing effect; Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
Abstract :
[en] In this paper, we revisit this well-established linear relationship of person-organisation, demands-abilities, and needs-supply fit with job satisfaction, commitment, and OCBs, and propose that this relationship may be linear for affective work outcomes but curvilinear for behavioural ones. We test this idea in a two-wave sample of 212 employees, with measures taken 4 weeks apart. The results support the idea that the relationship between fit and behavioural outcomes can, indeed, be curvilinear. Overall, this study contributes to a better understanding of the nature of the relationship between fit and work outcomes by challenging the long-held ‘more fit is better’ logic that pervades much of the PE fit research to date.
Research center :
LENTIC - Laboratoire d'Études sur les Nouvelles Formes de Travail, l'Innovation et le Changement - ULiège
Disciplines :
Human resources management
Author, co-author :
Vleugels, Wouter ; Université de Liège - ULiège > HEC Liège : UER > UER Management : Strategic and Sustainable Human Resource Management ; Deakin Business School, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
Flatau-Harrison, Huw ; Deakin Business School, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
Language :
English
Title :
Curvilinear relationships in person-environment fit research: Is there evidence for a too-much-of-a-good-thing effect?
Publication date :
2023
Journal title :
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Open access publishing facilitated by Deakin University, as part of the Wiley - Deakin University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.
Anderson, K. (1990). Arousal and the inverted-U hypothesis: A critique of Neiss's “reconceptualizing arousal”. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 96–100.
Baumeister, R., Vohs, K., Aaker, J., & Garbinsky, E. (2013). Some key differences between a happy life and a meaningful life. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8, 505–516.
Bolino, M., Turnley, W., & Niehoff, B. (2004). The other side of the story: Reexamining prevailing assumptions about organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 14, 229–246.
Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 875–884.
Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Chatman, J. A. (1989). Improving Interactional Organizational Research: A Model of Person-Organization Fit. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 333.
Choi, J. (2007). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Effects of work environment characteristics and intervening psychological processes. Journal of Organizational behavior, 28, 467–484.
Dalal, R., Lam, H., Weiss, H., Welch, E., & Hulin, C. (2009). A within-person approach to work behavior and performance: Concurrent and lagged citizenship-counterproductivity associations, and dynamic relationships with affect and overall job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 1051–1066.
Dawis, R., & Lofquist, L. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment. University of Minnesota Press.
De Cooman, R., & Vleugels, W. (2022). Person–Environment Fit: Theoretical Perspectives, Conceptualizations, and Outcomes. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.377
Edwards, J. (2008). Person-environment fit in organizations: An assessment of theoretical progress. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 167–230.
Ellemers, N., de Gilder, D., & van den Heuvel, H. (1998). Career-oriented versus team-oriented commitment and behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 717–730.
French, J., Caplan, R., & Harrison, R. (1982). The mechanisms of job stress and strain. Wiley.
Gabriel, A., Diefendorff, J., Chandler, M., Moran, C., & Greguras, G. (2014). The dynamic relationships of work affect and job satisfaction with perceptions of fit. Personnel Psychology, 67, 389–420.
Johns, G. (2021). Departures from conventional wisdom: Where's the next opposite effect? Academy of Management Discoveries, 7, 10–14.
Kristof-Brown, A., Zimmerman, R., & Johnson, E. (2005). Consequences of individuals' fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.
Leung, K., Huang, K.-L., Su, C.-H., & Lu, L. (2011). Curvilinear relationships between role stress and innovative performance: Moderating effects of perceived support for innovation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 741–758.
Newman, D. (2014). Missing data: Five practical guidelines. Organizational Research Methods, 17, 372–411.
Organ, D. (2018). Organizational citizenship behavior: Recent trends and developments. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational behavior, 80, 295–306.
Pierce, J., & Aguinis, H. (2013). The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management. Journal of Management, 39, 313–338.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453.
Selye, H. (1974). The stress of life. McGraw-Hill.
Tepper, B., Dimotakis, N., Lambert, L., Koopman, J., Matta, F., Man Park, H., & Goo, W. (2018). Examining follower responses to transformational leadership from a dynamic, person–environment fit perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 61, 1343–1368.
Veenhoven, R. (2003). Hedonism and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4, 437–457.
Vleugels, W., De Cooman, R., Verbruggen, M., & Solinger, O. (2018). Understanding dynamic change in perceptions of person–environment fit: An exploration of competing theoretical perspectives. Journal of Organizational behavior, 39, 1066–1080.
Vleugels, W., Tierens, H., Billsberry, J., Verbruggen, M., & De Cooman, R. (2019). Profiles of fit and misfit: A repeated weekly measures study of perceived value congruence. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28, 616–630.
Vleugels, W., Verbruggen, M., De Cooman, R., & Billsberry, J. (2023). A systematic review of temporal person-environment fit research: Trends, developments, obstacles, and opportunities for future research. Journal of Organizational behavior, 44, 376-398.
Yu, K. (2013). A motivational model of person-environment fit: Psychological motives as drivers of change. In A. Kristof-Brown & J. Billsberry (Eds.), Organizational fit: Key issues and new directions (pp. 21–49). Wiley-Blackwell.
