Explaining the effects of perceived person-supervisor fit and person-organization fit on organizational commitment in the U.S. and Japan

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.08.039Get rights and content

Abstract

The majority of research simultaneously examining multiple person–environment fit dimensions employs additive rather than interactive fit models. Although additive models allow researchers to compare the relative salience of fit dimensions, such models fail to capture the complex interdependencies of fit. Using employee samples from the U.S. and Japan, this study examines interdependence between perceived person-supervisor (P-S) fit and person-organization (P-O) fit and their associations with affective organizational commitment. Perceived P-S fit and affective organizational commitment are found to be related both directly and indirectly (through perceived P-O fit) in Japan but only indirectly in the U.S. In both countries, perceived P-O fit positively translates into affective organizational commitment through collectivistic values. The association between perceived P-S fit and affective organizational commitment was stronger in Japan than in the U.S., whereas the strength of the link between perceived P-O fit and affective organizational commitment did not differ across the two countries.

Introduction

For more than a decade, the importance of fit at work has been on radars of academicians and practitioners (Hill, 2013, Oh et al., 2014, Saks and Ashforth, 1997). Fit is identified by comparing internal aspects of the person, such as values, personality, goals, and abilities to conceptually relevant elements of the external environment, such as organizational or supervisor's values, personality, goals, and job demands (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005, Oh et al., 2014). A fundamental assumption of fit theory is that good fit leads to positive work outcomes and poor fit results in negative work outcomes. Indeed, research evidence is consistent in showing that fit at work is associated with increased job satisfaction, performance, organizational citizenship, organizational and occupational commitment, and reduced turnover (Bretz and Judge, 1994, Kristof-Brown et al., 2005).

Fit benefits at work make fit an attractive pursuit for both individuals and organizations. As Caplan (1987) noted, “organizations and their members have a fundamental stake in how well characteristics of the person and the environment of the organization fit one another” (p. 248). Organizations make every effort to hire and retain employees with high levels of fit. Likewise, employees strive for congruence with the organizational environment. Collectively, research and industry evidence point to a great importance of fit in the workplace and, consequently, the need to better understand fit–outcome relationships.

Although existing fit studies have unquestionably enriched our understanding of fit, several issues remain outstanding. Scholars have long noted that “individuals are simultaneously nested” and interact in multiple layers in the work environment, suggesting a co-existence of multiple dimensions of fit (Kristof-Brown et al., 2002, p. 985). Fit studies that employ multiple fit dimensions are not new (Cable and DeRue, 2002, Kristof-Brown, 2000, Oh et al., 2014). However, the majority of those studies employ an additive approach that assumes that fit dimensions are independent predictors of work outcomes and overall fit can be represented as an “algebraic amalgamation of its various dimensions” (Jansen & Kristof-Brown, 2006, p. 197). While this approach may be appropriate for comparing the relative salience of different fit dimensions, it fails to account for interdependence among these same dimensions (Oh et al., 2014). The interdependence of different environmental levels (e.g., individual, group, and organization) suggests the need for “an integrative view of PE [person–environment] fit and casting different types of fit as elements of a broader theoretical model” (Edwards & Shipp, 2007, p. 231). Although different manifestations of fit interdependencies may exist, one such manifestation involves models in which a fit dimension mediates the link between another fit dimension and outcomes (Edwards & Shipp, 2007).

Multi-dimensional fit research has generally combined P-O fit with D-A or N-S fit; only a handful of studies have simultaneously examined P-S fit and P-O fit (e.g., Oh et al., 2014, van Vianen et al., 2011). Perceived P-S and P-O fit are broadly referred to as congruence or similarities between the characteristics of an individual and the supervisor (P-S fit) or an individual and the organization (P-O fit). Because value-based congruence has become the most accepted way of operationalizing P-S fit and P-O fit (Hoffman et al., 2011, Kristof-Brown et al., 2005), I adopt this operationalization in the present study.

The importance of a co-examination of P-S fit and P-O fit is reflected in organizational practice and fit theory. As Hill (2013) acknowledges, both P-S and P-O are emerging as two interdependent types of fit in today's workplace, primarily because it is no longer sufficient to hire based on job fit alone; there must also be fit with the organization and others who work in it. For example, in a case study that describes hiring in elite professional service firms, Rivera (2012) emphasizes the importance of “cultural matching” between candidates, evaluators and firms. Similarly, fit researchers admit that simultaneous consideration of P-O fit and P-S fit is “particularly intriguing to study since organizational cultures and leaders seem fairly tied to each other” (van Vianen et al., 2011, p. 908).

Although van Vianen et al. (2011) attempt to test the interaction between P-S fit and P-O fit, they fail to empirically support that interaction and their final conclusions are based on the additive approach. One potential explanation for their non-significant finding may relate to the non-multiplicative nature of the interdependence between perceived P-S fit and P-S fit. Employees view supervisors as representatives of the organization and supervisors' behaviors are therefore expected to reflect organizational culture (Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002). This suggests that unless P-S fit contributes to P-O fit, it may not relate to positive work outcomes. In other words, P-O fit may serve as a mediator, rather than a moderator, with the effect of perceived P-S fit on work outcomes occurring through perceived P-O fit. This type of interdependence between P-S and P-O fit relationship needs to be further examined.

Although perceived P-S fit and P-O fit are associated with a number of positive outcomes, organizational commitment is deemed to be among of the most critical ones (van Vianen et al., 2011). The most frequently studied dimension of organizational commitment is affective commitment, defined as emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The examination of both P-S and P-O fit is particularly important in the context of organizational commitment because, from an additive perspective, both employee–supervisor and employee-organization value congruence are thought to contribute to the formation of emotional ties with the organization (van Vianen et al., 2011). However, the explanatory mechanisms that link P-S fit and P-O fit to organizational commitment remain unexplored (van Vianen et al., 2011). To date, the study by van Vianen et al. (2011) is the only study I am aware of that addresses the mechanisms (quality of the leader–member exchange and supervisor commitment) that account for the relationship between P-S fit and organizational commitment. The mechanisms that may account for the relationships between P-O fit and organizational commitment have not yet been examined.

To address the above limitations in fit research, this study examines the relationships between perceived P-S fit and P-O fit and affective organizational commitment, and explains why these relationships occur. Specifically, this study tests a theoretical model in which perceived P-O fit mediates the link between perceived P-S fit and affective organizational commitment. Perceptions of P-O fit are critical for enhancing cohesiveness in the organization (Cable & DeRue, 2002), and, therefore, in this model, perceived P-O fit influences organizational commitment by means of strengthening employees' sense of collectivism.

To assess the cross-cultural robustness of the proposed relationships, I test the model using employee samples from the U.S. (n = 300) and Japan (n = 300). The U.S. and Japan are particularly fruitful vantage points from which to gain an understanding of the proposed relationships. First, these countries are two major world powers which “together account for over 30% of world domestic product, for a significant portion of international trade in goods and services, and for a major portion of international investment” (Cooper, 2014, p. 1). Second, the cultural differences between the two countries—differences that are reflected in their respective organizational environments (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005)—may potentially influence fit–outcome relationships. This cross-cultural examination of the proposed relationships contributes to the generalizability of the study results and extends the fit and organizational commitment literatures.

Section snippets

Perceived P-S fit, perceived P-O fit and affective organizational commitment

The direct associations between P-S fit, P-O fit and organizational commitment have been addressed in previous research (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005, Oh et al., 2014). Theoretical arguments that underlie the link between P-S fit and organizational commitment build on the leader–member exchange (LMX; e.g., van Vianen et al., 2011) and perceptional similarities frameworks (Wexley & Pulakos, 1983). According to LMX theory, shared values serve as “a precursor of leader–member exchange quality” (

Survey translation

Prior to administering the study in Japan, the survey questions were translated into Japanese and back-translated into English (Brislin, 1980).

Participants and procedure

Three hundred participants from the U.S. and 300 participants from Japan participated in the study. Participants were recruited by Qualtrics Inc., using their “targeted audience” approach in contacting panel partners. The “targeted” criteria for each sample included permanent residency in the U.S. or Japan (for the U.S. and Japanese samples,

Measures

P-O fit perceptions were assessed using Cable and DeRue's (2002) 3-item measure. The sample item included “My organization's values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life.” The reliabilities were .96 and .95, in the U.S. and Japan, respectively.

To assess P-S fit perceptions, I used the 3-item P-O fit perceptions scale developed by Cable and DeRue (2002) and then adapted by Hoffman et al. (2011) to measure P-S fit. The sample item included “The things that I value in

Analyses and results

Table 1 shows descriptive statistics and correlations among the study variables for both the U.S. and Japanese samples. Prior to the formal hypotheses testing, I conducted tests to assess convergent and discriminant validity and cultural invariance of the study constructs and examined whether common method bias presented a concern for this study.

Discussion

As industry evidence shows, “cultural fit” has become a powerful buzzword for many organizations that no longer hire for a job but rather to hire for a fit with organizational culture and people in it (Hill, 2013). For example, Zappos promotes culture as its strategic weapon and therefore relies on cultural fit as the most important criterion for hiring (Zappos Bloggs, 2015). Similarly, the hiring process at Google is designed to select people who are the best fit for the organization, that is

Implications for research and theory

Taken together, these findings have a number of important implications for research and practice. Most importantly, this study employs an interdependent (as opposed to additive) approach to understand the relationships between perceived P-S and P-O fit and affective organizational commitment. The supported mediating role of perceived P-O fit on the relationship between perceived P-S fit and organizational commitment further validates the nested nature of fit dimensions that has been suggested

Limitations and future research directions

Although this study examined the least explored combination of the P-S and P-O fit dimensions, combinations of other fit dimensions should also be studied. Because an individual simultaneously experiences fit with multiple domains (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005), future research should examine other multi-fit models to identify interconnections among different fit dimensions as well as their complex relationships with work outcomes. This will likely reflect “a more realistic picture” of fit

References (50)

  • N. Boyacigiller et al.

    The parochial dinosaur: Organizational science in a global context

    Academy of Management Review

    (1991)
  • R.D. Bretz et al.

    Person-organization fit and the theory of work adjustment: Implications for satisfaction, tenure, and career success

    Journal of Vocational Behavior

    (1994)
  • R.W. Brislin
  • C.M. Brotheridge et al.

    We are family: Congruity between organizational and family functioning constructs

    Human Relations

    (2006)
  • D.M. Cable et al.

    The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2002)
  • Z.X. Chen et al.

    Loyalty to supervisor versus organizational commitment: Relationship with the performance of Chinese employees

    Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

    (2002)
  • Colbert, A. E. (2004). Understanding the effects of transformational leadership: The mediating role of leader–follower...
  • W.H. Cooper

    U.S.–Japan economic relations: Significance, prospects, and policy options

  • H.D. Cooper-Thomas et al.

    Changes in person-organization fit: The impact of socialization tactics on perceived and actual P-O fit

    European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

    (2004)
  • P.C. Earley

    Social loafing and collectivism: A comparison of the United States and the People's Republic of China

    Administrative Sciences Quarterly

    (1989)
  • J.R. Edwards et al.

    The relationship between person–environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework

  • R. Eisenberger et al.

    Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2002)
  • M. Erez et al.

    Is group productivity loss the rule or the exception? Effects of culture and group-based motivation

    Academy of Management Journal

    (1996)
  • J.L. Farh et al.

    Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1997)
  • J.L. Farh et al.

    Accounting for organizational citizenship behavior: Leader fairness and task scope versus satisfaction

    Journal of Management

    (1990)
  • Cited by (82)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    The data collection for this study was possible through the generous support of the Center for Retail Enterprises, the University Texas at Tyler.

    View full text