2007
DOI: 10.1348/096317906x115453
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Perceived similarity and complementarity as predictors of subjective person‐organization fit

Abstract: We examined whether subjective person-organization (P-O) fit arises from perceptions of similarity, complementarity or some combination of both. Data were collected from 209 employees of various occupational and organizational backgrounds. Results indicated that individuals distinguish between fit that occurs through similarity and complementarity, and that both explain unique variance in subjective P-O fit. Subjective fit was associated with higher levels of job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

8
109
1
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(120 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
8
109
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman and Johnson (2005: 285), PO fit "addresses the compatibility between people and entire organizations"; while Guan et al (2011: 286) define PO fit as "the congruence of values between a person and the organization where he/she works". Piasentin and Chapman (2007) argue that the research has mostly concentrated on assessing the similarity between personal and organizational characteristics instead of how individuals experience the fit. Kristof (1996), Cable and Edwards (2004) and Humphrey et al (2007; are usually researched separately, they probably operate simultaneously.…”
Section: Person-organization Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…According to Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman and Johnson (2005: 285), PO fit "addresses the compatibility between people and entire organizations"; while Guan et al (2011: 286) define PO fit as "the congruence of values between a person and the organization where he/she works". Piasentin and Chapman (2007) argue that the research has mostly concentrated on assessing the similarity between personal and organizational characteristics instead of how individuals experience the fit. Kristof (1996), Cable and Edwards (2004) and Humphrey et al (2007; are usually researched separately, they probably operate simultaneously.…”
Section: Person-organization Fitmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individuals who feel fit, and develop relationships further in the organization, are more likely to build positive relationships and support one another. Piasentin and Chapman (2007) perceive complementary fit as occurring when individuals can complement other employees' characteristics by their unique skills that are also valuable to the organization. Combining capabilities between individuals enhances effectual partnerships-when individuals know how the other person will fulfill their capabilities, it is easier for them to cooperate.…”
Section: Partnerships In Job Development: the Crazy Quilt Principle Imentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many researchers and practitioners underline the importance of the P-O fit for an organization. It is related to evaluate their P-O fit, this relationship is studied mostly at the stage of entering organizations but not in employees with some job tenure within an organization [13]. The studies on the role of socio-demographic characteristics in shaping the level of P-O fit are vague [16][17][18][19][20] and have brought confounding results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Supplementary P-O fit is defined as the congruence of goals, values and norms of an organization with goals, values and norms of an employee. In turn, the complementary P-O fit takes place when an employee and work environment complement one another by addressing each other's needs, e.g., an employee has skills valued by the organization and the organization rewards him/her with the resources he/ she needs [12,13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bu uyum algısı, farklı kişilik ya da geçmişe sahip bireylerin farklı örgüt tiplerini tercih etmesi ya da benimsemesi şeklinde örgüt ve yönetim alanına yansımaktadır (Cable & Judge, 1996). Birey-örgüt uyumu çerçevesinde yürütülen araştırmalar, bu yapının hem bireysel hem de örgütsel düzeyde çıktılarının ve etkilerinin olduğunu rapor etmiştir (örn: Kristof-Brown et al, 2005;Piasentin & Chapman, 2007;van Vuuren et al, 2007;Verquer et a.,2003). Algılanan birey-örgüt uyumunun bireysel düzeydeki yansımaları incelendiğinde, örgütü ile daha yüksek düzeyde uyum algılayan bireylerin, diğerlerine göre iş doyumu düzeylerinin daha yüksek olduğu (Cooper- Thomas et al, 2004;Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001;Liu et al, 2010;Piasentin & Chapman, 2007;Ulutaş et al, 2015;Wheeler et al, 2007), buna bağlı olarak iş performanslarının da olumlu yönde etkilendiği (Goodman & Svyantek, 1999;Hoffman & Woehr, 2006) ve bu durumun ise maaş zammı, ikramiye ya da terfi gibi kariyerlerine doğrudan katkısının olduğunu göstermiştir (Bretz & Judge, 1994;Cable & Judge, 1996.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified