•This seems like a vital theory to further research. Researchers should be testing the reliability and criterion-related validity of this theory in relation to other constructs.
This was a thorough but good, critical review of the organizational fit literature. It seems one would need a specific reason to assess organizational fit. What would these reasons be? Also, how can you quantify this fit effectively? How can you define an organization as a whole?
What I gathered from this article is that there are many different ways to define P-E fit, depending on your outcome of interest and the theory you use when developing your P-E definition. Thus, there seems to be little construct validity in this concept as we cannot seem to agree on a good way to define P-E fit. How can we justify the use of this in selection settings? Additionally, might it be true that P-E and P-O fit might demonstrate a curvilinear relationship with some outcomes? Is it possible to fit too well with an environment or an organization?
I agree Vicki. Right now it seems like organizations are putting themselves in a difficult position if they are using P-E to select employees. How do you think using this sort of thing for selection might effect organizational justice?
Organizations that use a valid and reliable selection process require applicants to go through a fairly rigorous evaluation process through which they learn a good deal about the individual applicants. What opportunities do applicants really have to assess the organization at a level that will allow them to assess P-E fit? Do you think the power differential involved in the interview, especially if it is highly structured provides the opportunity for applicants to assess what the manager will be like to work for?
Edwards obviously reviews and evaluates a number of person-organization fit theories. Did one standout to you as a theory that would be useful in an applied setting?
I found this review very helpful as it is an area I am interested in, but knew little about the research that had been done. It scares me now to think about the complexity of it and how unspecified it usually is. A couple of things I found especially noteworthy: Schneider's speculation that a negative outcome of fit is that organizations become homogeneous. I had not thought about that. I also appreciated Edwards suggestion of the various levels of fit: person and job, and group, and org, and vocation. Wow. THis also made me realize how important it is for an organization to describe its values, goals, and mission along with a job spec (position description) in the advertising to promote proper self-selection/self-screening - though this would be moderated by economic times (unemployment, etc.)
•This seems like a vital theory to further research. Researchers should be testing the reliability and criterion-related validity of this theory in relation to other constructs.
ReplyDeleteThis was a thorough but good, critical review of the organizational fit literature. It seems one would need a specific reason to assess organizational fit. What would these reasons be? Also, how can you quantify this fit effectively? How can you define an organization as a whole?
ReplyDeleteWhat I gathered from this article is that there are many different ways to define P-E fit, depending on your outcome of interest and the theory you use when developing your P-E definition. Thus, there seems to be little construct validity in this concept as we cannot seem to agree on a good way to define P-E fit. How can we justify the use of this in selection settings? Additionally, might it be true that P-E and P-O fit might demonstrate a curvilinear relationship with some outcomes? Is it possible to fit too well with an environment or an organization?
ReplyDeleteI agree Vicki. Right now it seems like organizations are putting themselves in a difficult position if they are using P-E to select employees. How do you think using this sort of thing for selection might effect organizational justice?
ReplyDeleteOrganizations that use a valid and reliable selection process require applicants to go through a fairly rigorous evaluation process through which they learn a good deal about the individual applicants. What opportunities do applicants really have to assess the organization at a level that will allow them to assess P-E fit? Do you think the power differential involved in the interview, especially if it is highly structured provides the opportunity for applicants to assess what the manager will be like to work for?
ReplyDeleteEdwards obviously reviews and evaluates a number of person-organization fit theories. Did one standout to you as a theory that would be useful in an applied setting?
ReplyDeleteI found this review very helpful as it is an area I am interested in, but knew little about the research that had been done. It scares me now to think about the complexity of it and how unspecified it usually is.
ReplyDeleteA couple of things I found especially noteworthy: Schneider's speculation that a negative outcome of fit is that organizations become homogeneous.
I had not thought about that.
I also appreciated Edwards suggestion of the various levels of fit: person and job, and group, and org, and vocation. Wow.
THis also made me realize how important it is for an organization to describe its values, goals, and mission along with a job spec (position description) in the advertising to promote proper self-selection/self-screening - though this would be moderated by economic times (unemployment, etc.)