2001
DOI: 10.1006/jvbe.2001.1807
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Distinguishing between Employees' Perceptions of Person–Job and Person–Organization Fit

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

17
521
2
18

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 650 publications
(558 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
17
521
2
18
Order By: Relevance
“…Conclusively, it should be explained that although some overlaps can be considered between these levels of P-E fit, but according to the empirical and conceptual proofs, the existing of differentiations among these levels of P-E fit is affirmed Saks & Ashforth, 1997Werbel & Gilliland, 1999;Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001). …”
Section: Several Levels Of P-e Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Conclusively, it should be explained that although some overlaps can be considered between these levels of P-E fit, but according to the empirical and conceptual proofs, the existing of differentiations among these levels of P-E fit is affirmed Saks & Ashforth, 1997Werbel & Gilliland, 1999;Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001). …”
Section: Several Levels Of P-e Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scholars and practitioners who are interested in the concept P-E fit opine in positive impacts of it on employee attitudes and behaviour (Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001). For instance, researches have corroborated the direct correlation of P-E fit and job satisfaction, career success, organizational effectiveness, health and adaptation, organization commitment, and individuals' career involvement.…”
Section: The Concept Of P-e Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Organizational commitment is most influenced by P-O fit, job satisfaction by P-J fit, satisfaction with coworkers by P-G fit, and satisfaction with supervisor by P-S fit. Despite these various forms of fit and their associated consequences, P-O and P-J fit are the most commonly investigated (Lauver & Kristof, 2001), and have been quite influential during various phases and perspectives of the selection process (e.g., Cable & Judge, 1996;Goldberg, 2003).…”
Section: Person-organizational Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…S-V fit is focused on whether employees and organizations possess the same values (Cable & Edwards, 2004). Congruence between individual and organizational values has been shown to result in increased positive behaviors, such as extra-role behavior (Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001). As such, it is most closely related to supplementary fit (Muchinsky & Monahan, 1987).…”
Section: Demand-abilities Need-supplies and Supplies-values Fit Dementioning
confidence: 99%
“…P E fit is broadly defined as the compatibility between individual and work environment that occurs when their characteristics are well matched. In the recruitment context P E fit perspective states that potential applicants are more attracted to environ ments with characteristics that are compatible to the indi vidual characteristics (Kristof 1996;Lauver, Kristof 2001). Lauver and Kristof (2001) …”
Section: Person Environment Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%