AN INTEGRATIVE INVESTIGATION OF PERSON-VOCATION FIT, PERSON- ORGANIZATION FIT, AND PERSON-JOB FIT PERCEPTIONS Michael Kennedy, B.A. Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS May 2005 APROVED: Joseph Huff, Major Professor Michael Beyerlein, Committee Member and Interim Chair of Industrial and Organizational Psychology Program Douglas Johnson, Committee Member Joel Quintela, Committee Member Linda Marshall, Interim Chair, Department of Psychology Sandra L. Terrell, Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies Kennedy, Michael, An integrative investigation of person-vocation fit, person- organization fit, and person-job fit perceptions. Doctor of Philosophy (Industrial and Organizational Psychology), May 2005, 264 pp., 26 tables, 8 illustrations, references, 188 titles. Person-environment (PE) fit has been considered one of the most pervasive concepts in psychology. This study presents an integrative investigation of three levels of PE fit: person-vocation (PV) fit, person-organization (PO) fit, and person-job (PJ) fit, using multiple conceptualizations (e.g., value congruence, needs-supplies fit) of each fit level. While a trend in the PE fit literature has been the inclusion of only one fit level with a single conceptualization, researchers call for the addition of multiple conceptualizations of multiple fit levels in a single study. Traditionally, PO fit has been conceptualized as value congruence, whereas PV fit has remained untouched in the literature investigating the direct measurement of fit perceptions. Therefore, new fit perceptions scales assessing PO fit using a needs-supplies fit conceptualization and PV fit using a variety of conceptualizations were introduced. To address the limitation of employing direct measures, common method variance was modeled with a positive affect factor. The study accomplished two objectives. First, a previously supported three-factor model of fit perceptions consisting of PO value congruence (PO-VC), PJ needs-supplies (PJ-NS), and PJ demands-abilities (PJ-DA) fit was strongly replicated. Second, this model was expanded by examining additional conceptualizations (needs-supplies, demands-abilities fit, value, personality, and interest congruence) of fit levels (PV, PO, and PJ fit). Results suggested that professionals make distinctions based on both the fit level and fit conceptualization and these fit perceptions uniquely influence their attitudes and behaviors. A six-factor model (PO-VC, PJ-NS, PJ-DA, PO needs-supplies fit [PO- NS], PV demands-abilities fit [PV-DA], and general PV fit) best fit the data. Providing ample evidence of construct validity, PO fit perceptions (PO-VC and PO-NS fit) were related to the organization-focused outcome of organizational identification, whereas the profession-focused outcome of occupational commitment was exclusively predicted by PV fit perceptions (PV-DA and general PV fit). As expected, both needs-supplies fit perceptions (PO-NS and PJ-NS fit) predicted intentions to quit and job satisfaction. Recommendations for future research are suggested. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. iv LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1 Levels of Fit Conceptualizations of Fit Measurement of Fit Detailed Review of Fit Levels Current Study and Research Questions 2. METHOD ..............................................................................................................59 Participants Procedure Study Variables 3. RESULTS ..............................................................................................................68 Data Analytic Strategy Data Screning Fit Models Descriptive Statistics Common Method Variance Analyses Full Structural Model Analyses Multiple Regression Analyses for Other-Rated Behavior 4. DISCUSSION......................................................................................................113 Model Replication Model Expansion Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Fit Scales Post Hoc Model Expansion Analyses ii Limitations Future Research Practical Implications Conclusions APPENDIX......................................................................................................................153 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................243 iii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Conceptualizations of PE Fit Levels..........................................................12 Table 2 Measurement of PE Fit Levels...................................................................19 Table 3 Fit Factors and Hypothesized Relationships to Outcomes ........................57 Table 4 Model Replication: Fit Statistics for Alternative Models ..........................72 Table 5 Model Expansion: Fit Statistics for Alternative Models............................74 Table 6 Expanded Hypothesized Relationships to Reflect Six-Factor Model........75 Table 7 Descriptive Statistics, Intercorrelations, and Internal Reliability Estimates .78 Table 8 Completely Standardized Parameter Estimates for Confounded Model 1b .85 Table 9 Interfactor Correlations Between Substantive Variables...........................89 Table 10 Fit Statistics for Confounded and Congeneric Models ..............................92 Table 11 Indicator Loadings for the Hypothesized Measurement Model ..............100 Table 12a Interfactor Correlations for the Hypothesized Measurement Model .......103 Table 12b Structural Parameters of Fit and Positive Affect Predictors and Outcomes .10 Table 13 Subjective Fit Perceptions Prediction of Other-Rated OCBs and Job Performance .............................................................................................112 iv Table 14 Post Hoc Model Expansion: Alternative Models.....................................132 Table 15 Post Hoc Model Expansion: Fit Statistics for Alternative Models ..........133 Table 16a Post Hoc Model Expansion: PV Value Congruence and Reduced General PV Fit Scales ..............................................................................135 Table 16b Structural Parameters of Alternative Model 7b .......................................139 Table 17 Sources of Initial 43 Fit Items..................................................................166 Table 18 Factor Loadings for the Remaining 30 Fit Items .....................................168 Table 19 Factor Loadings for the Remaining 30 Fit Items (Forced Four-Factor Model)......................................................................................................170 Table 20 Factor Loadings for the Remaining 30 Fit Items (Forced Three-Factor Model)......................................................................................................171 Table 21 Negatively and Comparatively Worded PV Fit Items .............................172 Table 22 Item Revisions for Negatively Worded PV Fit Items Loading on Factor Two ..........................................................................................................173 Table 23 Descriptive Statistics, Intercorrelations, and Internal Reliability Estimates .174 Table 24 Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Subjective Fit Perceptions.....175 v TABLE OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 Conceptual Distinctions Between Supplementary and Complementary Fit Perspectives..................................................................................................6 Figure 2 Full Model of Fit Factors and Hypothesized Relationships to Outcomes .58 Figure 3 Confounded Confirmatory Factor Model ..................................................83 Figure 4 Congeneric Complex Structural Model .....................................................94 Figure 5 Proposed Structural Model with Hypothesized Relationships...................98 Figure 6 Structural Model of Fit and Positive Affect Predictors and Outcomes .109 Figure 7 Structural Parameters of Alternative Model 7b .......................................138 Figure 8 Scree Plot for the Remaining 30 Fit Items...............................................169 vi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Person-environment (PE) fit, or the congruence/fit between a person and his or her work environment, has been extensively researched during the past decade (e.g., Bowen, Ledford, & Nathan, 1991; Cable & DeRue, 2002; Chatman, 1991; Edwards, 1991; Judge & Cable, 1997; Kristof, 1996; Kristof-Brown, 2000; Kristof-Brown, Jansen, & Colbert, 2002; Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001; Saks & Ashforth, 1997, 2002). Schneider (2001), one of the leaders in the field of fit research, has identified the concept as one of the most pervasive concepts in psychology (Walsh, Craik, & Price, 2000), relating to personality theory (Endler & Magnusson, 1976; Magnusson & Endler, 1977; Pervin & Lewis, 1978) vocational psychology (Holland, 1997), personnel selection (Schmitt & Borman, 1993), and social psychology (Aronoff & Wilson, 1985). Researchers within the areas of industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology, organizational behavior (OB), and vocational psychology have extended the investigation of PE fit by examining fit between individuals and various aspects of their environment (Feij, Van Der Velde, Taris, & Taris, 1999; Kristof-Brown et al., 2002). PE fit is a discipline that lies at the crossroads of several theories such as interaction theory (Lewin, 1951), need-press theory (Murray, 1938), the Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA; Dawis & Lofquist, 1984), the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA; Schneider, 1987) model, and Holland’s (1973, 1997) theory of vocational behavior. 1 Lewin’s (1951) interaction theory states that an individual’s behavior (B) is determined by the interaction between the individual (P) and the environment (E) represented by the equation: B = f(P, E) (Kristof-Brown et al., 2002; Schneider, 2001). For example, theories of PE fit contain a central tenet stating that the individual’s positive experience is due to that individual working in an environment well-suited to his or her personal characteristics (Kristof-Brown et al., 2002). In need-press theory (Murray, 1938), environmental “presses” aid or block individuals from meeting their psychological and physical needs. Therefore, fit is determined by the degree to which an individual’s needs are fulfilled by the environment (Kristof, 1996). Based on the TWA, “individuals and environments impose requirements of one another that ‘successful’ work relations are the result of adjustments intended to create a state of correspondence between individual and environmental characteristics” (Bretz & Judge, 1994, p. 32). Furthermore, according to the third proposition of the TWA, increased job satisfaction results from the correspondence (or “fit”) between individual and environmental characteristics. Schneider’s (1987) ASA model “rests on the fundamental assumption that people in any organization are unique in that they are the ones attracted to, chosen by, and who choose to remain with an organization” (Schneider, Smith, Taylor, & Fleenor, 1998, p. 463). Thus, fit is determined by the congruence between the personality of the individual and that of the organization. Finally, Holland’s (1973, 1997) theory of vocational behavior posits that an individual’s vocational satisfaction, stability, and achievement are determined by the congruence between the individual’s interests and his or her vocational environment. 2