Test paper
S C
Reference4.pdf
1 Lecturer, Management Sciences, University of Bunner, Pakistan. [email protected]
2 Assistant Professor, Management Sciences, Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan.
311 C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
City University Research Journal Volume 08 Number 02 July 2018 PP 311-321
THE NEXUS OF PERSON ORGANIZATION FIT AND PERSON JOB FIT TO JOB SATISFACTION: A CASE OF KP EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS 1 2
Muhammad Tufail and M. Jehahgir
ABSTRACT Person job fit and person organization fit were studied with a purpose to see whether they have any
effect on job satisfaction. The study was carried out in a randomly selected sample of the 78 teachers
from 11 private and public-sector universities and colleges of Peshawar. Cross-sectional data was
collected through questionnaire. It was found that Person Job and Person Organization fits do not
affect job satisfaction, in any institution except one, which is contrary to common notion of the
positive relationship between the variables. Managers can benefit from the results of the study by
incorporating them in their recruiting practices. Keeping in mind the scope of the study the results can
only be applicable to Peshawar and its vicinity.
Key Words: Person Organization fit, Person Job Fit, Job Satisfaction
INTRODUCTION Job satisfaction, motivation, task performance, employee retention (Brayfield & Rothe, 1951; Vroom,
1964; Locke, & Latham, 1990; Eisenberger et al., 2002) are topics which have grasped the interest of
the researchers for a long. Post 1970s scholars have started studying the role of Person Environment fit
and its different facets such as Person organization fit, Person job fit, Person Environment fit,
(Kristof-Brown, 2000; Cable & Judge, 1996; Jansen & Kristof, 2006) and their influences on work
attitudes, performance and job satisfaction. Person environment fit has a broader scope, as mentioned above, so its different facets have been
studied separately e.g. person organization fit and person job fit and their positive impacts on work
attitudes Saks & Ashforth, 1997) job satisfaction, job performance, organization commitment
(Lauver & Kristof, 2001; June & Mahmood, 2011) and organization citizenship behavior (Yen & Ok,
2011). The current study aimed to know the different effects of two fits that is person organization
and person job fit on job satisfaction. Edwards (1991) defined person job fit as the match detween the
demands of the job and abilities of the employees. While person organization fit can be said as the
compatibilty between the employees and the organization (Kristof, 1996). In the recent history of management research, the interest is growing to find out that to what extent job
satisfaction is affected by the constructs like person organization and person job fit. The riddle to
resolve whether it is the person or situation that determines the human behaviour (Sekiguchi, 2004) is
a hot issue among the researchers. One school of thought considers situation (Davis-Blake, & Pfeffer,
1989), while the other is of the view that it is the person (Shane, Herold, & House, 1996), who shapes
human behaviour. But if we go deeper and see the roots of the person environment fit, which are to be
found in the interactionist theory (Funder, 2006), it states that neither person nor situation is
responsible for the behaviour. In fact, according to the interactionist theory, amalgamation of the both
312
causes the variance (Sekiguchi, 2004).
When we look at the whole picture and discern that person environment fit exists, it means in turn fits
like person organization and person job also exist up to some extent. Lauver & Kristof (2001) say that
both these constructs have influences on the positive work attitudes but not similar and
interdependent. As they further elaborate that a person may not fit in an organization regardless his
perfect job fit. Another study found that both these constructs correlated highly but admitted that the
effects of both are unique on employee attitudes (Saks & Ashforth, 1997). Other than, that gender also
plays a role in determining what are the things that will enhance person organization and person job fit
such as Venkatesh et al. (2017), argue that men give more deliberate in determining their person
organization fit perceptions. They further argue that intrinsic outcomes affected perceptions for men
and women in the same manner while gender plays moderating role for the effects of extrinsic
outcomes on person organization fit. Keeping in view the previous findings of different studies,
present study tries to look whether person organization fit and person job fit have any relationship with
job satisfaction.
OBJECTIVES Ÿ To find out whether Person Organization fit and Person Job fit have any relation with job
satisfaction or not.
Ÿ To find out relationship with of person organization fit and person job fit with job satisfaction
in different educational institutes
LITERATURE REVIEW Person job fit is defined as the relevance between the capabilities of an individual and the demands of a
post or the aspirations of an individual and what is offered by a job (Edwards, 1991). In contrast,
person organization fit is “the compatibility between people and organizations that occurs when at
least one entity provides what the other needs, they share similar fundamental characteristics, or both”
(Kristof, 1996, pp. 4–5). As discussed above, they have unique effects on work attitudes (Saks &
Ashforth, 1997) due to their independent nature (Kristof, 1996). People who enjoy person
organization fit may try to switch over a job within an organization because of low person job fit, but
they will not leave the organization (Becker & Billings, 1993).
Correlation of person organization and person job fits with job satisfaction is fairly researched. It is
clear that job satisfaction is caused mainly by different duties an employee performs on daily basis. It
is a fact that job satisfaction caused by these activities is more closely connected with job fit as
compared to person organization fit, which is rarely concerned with such activities. On the basis of the
above facts, it can be said that perceived person job has more influence on job satisfaction than that of
the perceived person organization fit (Lauver & Kristof, 2001).
Kristof (1996) describes four elements of the person organization fit. First element is the person and
organization value congruence, second is the goal congruence, third, compatibility of the employee's
needs and the organization's structures and lastly, the match between the person's personality and
organization's ambiance. This discussion suggests that high person organization fit is correlated with
several positive work attitudes, but it is not always the case, because some researchers have found
some interesting relationships while investigating the person organization relationship with work
attitudes. For instance, researchers (Sekiguchi, 2004).
C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
The Nexus of Person Organization Fit and Person Job Fit to Job Satisfaction: A Case...
Kristof and Lauver (2001) not only tried to investigate relationship of person job and person
organization fit with job satisfaction, but also with job performance. Performance is deemed to be
increased if the knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) of the job incumbents are in accordance with
the job specifications (Calwell O Reilly, 1990). Person job fit, as discussed above, is decided upon the
relevance between the knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) and job requirements. That's why
person job fit shows positive relation with job performance (Lauver & Kristof, 2001). As discussed
person job fit has a close connection with KSAs so the higher the person job fit the higher shall be the
job performance. On the other hand, person organization fit has little linkage with daily activities, and
therefore does not affect the performance largely. However, it has a positive relation with organization
commitment (ibid).
Regardless of the person organization fit weak connection with the task performance, the relationship
between the two has also been the topic of many researchers. Tziner (1987), found a positive relation
among the personality and climate of the organization with the performance. And on the basis of the
above, Lauver and Kristof (2001) state that an employee may not perform well but his/her value
congruence, with that of the manager and organization, may be the cause of the employee retention in
the organization.
June and Mahmood (2011) carried out the study in the service sector and SMEs of Malaysia and came
to the conclusion that job fit has a positive relation with job performance. They further explain that
employees will work hard and fulfill their responsibilities if person job fit exits. In their view person
job fit is the basis of motivation for the job performance and in case of low person job fit the chances of
performing the duties well may be less. Study in the food service sector showed that all those
employees who enjoy high person organization and person job fits perform their jobs with more
enthusiasm than those whose person organization and person job fits are low. Further they also score
high on organization citizenship behaviors both on organization and individual level (Yen & Ok,
2011).
Different reseachers explore different aspects of the person organization and person job fits and their
impact on job satisfaction, organization commitment (O'Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwel, 1991; Yen &
Ok, 2011; Lauver & Kristof, 2001), intention to quit, job performance (O'Reilly, Chatman, &
Caldwel, 1991; Lauver & Kristof, 2001; June & Mahmood, 2011; Robert, Bretz & Judge, 1992) and
psychological ownership (Han et al., 2015). Some have also studied the relationship between person
organization fit and career success. The findings revealed that person organization fit has great
contribution towards career success, not only extrinsically but the intrinsic measures of success were
predicted by the person organization fit.
Kristof-Brown (2000) argue that during recruitment that the applicants seek person organization fit
and his/her values and personlity traits are of immense importance, while in person job fit knowledge,
skills and abilities are of paramount importance. Overall result of the study shows that person
organization and person job fit are not taken together as one in the early stages of interviews. Person
job subjective fit has two factors: personality and job characteristic beliefs (JCBs) (Ehrhart, 2006).
Findings of Ehrhart's research suggested that both the factors; personality and JCBs contribute in
developing subjective person job fit.
Cable and Judge (1996) studied 96 job seekers at three diffierent phases. The purpose of the study was
to investigate the factors determining person organization fit perceptions of the job seekers and how
crucial person organization fit was towards performing the job efficiently. Reaeaech showed that
313 C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Tufail et al.
person organization fit of an employee is determined by the match between the values of the
employee and organization. Person organization fit is responsible for determining both work
attitudes and job selection. Silverthrone (2004) results indicate that person organization fit is
responsible for job satisfaction and with the organization commitment. The concept becomes clear
that people in organizations where they are supressed and not heard are less satisfied with their jobs
and have low organization commitment. On the contrary, those who find an innovative culture in
organization are more satisfied with their jobs and show better commitment towards organization.
Another important and novel aspect of this particular reseach is that it says that person organization fit
is more vital in organizations in non Westerns cultures.
Job satisfaction is said to be an emotional reaction to work environment (Ilies & Judge, 2004). But the
most comprehensive definition is given by Locke (1976) “job satisfaction is a pleasurable or positive
emotional state resulting from an appraisal of one's job or job experiences'' (p.1300). Yoav (1998)
investigated the relationship between intelligence and job satisfaction. According to the model, used
in the study, intelligence negatively affects job satisfaction, and indirectly positively affects job
complexity. Results of the study predicted the direct positive effects of education and intelligence on
job complexity which in turn cause job satisfaction. Downes et al. (2016), found that autonomus
motives have positve relation with goal specific efficacy and perceived person organization fit and at
the same time indirectly affects goal accomplishment and job staisfaction.
In the field of research on person organization fit and person job fit, different researchers studied the
topics from different perpectives and different aspects e.g. job satisfaction, job performance, (Lauver
& Kristof, 2001; June & Mahmood, 2011; Silverthrone, 2004) organization commitment
(Silverthrone, 2004; Lauver & Kristof, 2001) etc. Though personality can effect job satisfaction,
others say environment affects job satisfaction, yet others that is interactionists are of the view that it
is determind by both person and environment. Therefore, in the present study person organization and
person job fits will be studied to find relationship with job satisfaction. Other aspects have also been
studied by other researchers. But the aim of this study is to know the relationship of job satisfaction
with person organization and person job fit.
Hypothesis:
H1: Person organization fit and Person job fits have a relationship with Job Satisfaction
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The data for the study have been collected once that is cross-sectional data. The researcher visited the
institutes and collected the data from the respondents through questionnaires. Population of the study
was all the colleges and universities of the Peshawar city (KPK Pakistan). Unit of analysis is
individual.
3.1 Measures
Person organization fit. The fit was measured through three questions, already had been used by Cable
and Judge (1996). (“To what degree do you feel your values “match” or fit this organization?”, “Your
values match those of the current employees in this organization”, “Do you think the values and
“personality” of this organization reflect your own values and personality?”) The respondents rated
their perceived fit on 5-point Likert scale which ranges from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree.
314C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
The Nexus of Person Organization Fit and Person Job Fit to Job Satisfaction: A Case...
The reliability of the measure was 0.87.
Person job fit. For the measurement of perceived person job fit, a five-item measure (Xie, 1996) was
used. In those five questions some were about the fit in a sense of skills and abilities, and some were
about personality and temperament. (“I feel that my work utilizes my full abilities”, “I feel that my job
and I are well matched”, “My job gives me a chance to do the thing I feel I do best”). The Likert type
scale was 5-point which was used here too. The source of the measure was, and reliability was .73.
Job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was measured using the five items Brayfield and Rothe (1951) job
satisfaction scale. (“I feel fairly satisfied with my present job”, “Most days I am enthusiastic about my
work”, “Each day of work seems like it will never end”). Here the same 5-point Likert scale had been
used. The reliability of the measure was 0.84.
To understand the variables and their relationships, several notable works of the prominent
researchers were studied. The purpose of the present study is to find whether person organization fit
and person job fit have some relation with job satisfaction or not. The data for the study have been
collected once that is cross sectional data. The researcher himself visited the institutes and collected
the data from the respondents through questionnaires. The questionnaire consisted of 13 questions
had been distributed among the employees of each selected organization.
3.2 Population
All the colleges and universities of the Peshawar city were taken as the population, with no
discrimination among private and public Institutes. The total number of the institutes (see annex 1)
was 40. The technique used for the selection was simple random sampling. 30% of the whole
population was selected. Among the whole sample size 3 institutes were public and remaining 9 were
private. However, one Institute did not participate; therefore, the data was collected from 11 Institutes.
3.3 Sample
Total respondents of the survey were 78 Respondents were requested not to leave any question
unmarked. Total number of females who were surveyed during the study was 30 which make 38.5% of
the total respondents and 48 were males which make 61.5% of the all the respondents.
RESULTS 4.1 Descriptive
37 (47.4%) of the respondents were between the ages of 20-28, 35 (44.9%) were 28-40, 5 (6.4%) were
between 40-50 and only 1 (1.3%) of the respondents was above 50. 72 of the 78 respondents were
between the age group of 20-40 which make 92.3% of the whole. Education wise 50 (64.1%) of the
respondents were master degree holders, 20 (25.6%) were having MS degrees, 5 (6.4%) were PhDs
while 3 (3.8%) were with bachelor degrees who had been surveyed during the research.
4.2 Means Comparison:
Means and standard deviations of the variables were calculated and found that mean of the Person
organization fit was below average (mean=2.23, std. dev.=.486) while for Person job and Job
Satisfaction the means and standard deviation were (mean=3.57, std. dev.=.51 and mean=4.37, std.
dev.=.55) respectively.
315 C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Tufail et al.
4.3 ANOVA
A one-way between subject's ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of the person organization
fit and person job fit on the Job Satisfaction in different organizations. The means of all the variables
were below average and the results were insignificant which indicate that there was no difference in
the person organization, person job fits and job satisfaction of the respondents of different
organizations. The results are shown in table no. 13.
Table 13: Difference ANOVA Results
4.4 Cross Tabs
The categories in which the education was divided were: Bachelors, Master, MS and PhD. 50 of the
respondents which comprise 64.1% of the whole were master degree holders, 20 (25.6%) were having
MS degrees, 5 (6.4%) were PhDs while 3 (3.8%) were with bachelor degrees who had been surveyed
during the research.
4.5 T-Test
An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare whether there is any difference in degree of
Job Satisfaction between male and female respondents. Analysis showed that there was no significant
difference in the scores of males (M=3.49, SD=.475) and female (M=3.70, SD=.542) conditions; t
(76) =-1.839, p=.07. These results suggest that job satisfaction remains the same among the males and
females irrespective of the gender. See table 3 and 4.
Table 4: It Shows Whether Job Satisfaction Varies Among Males and Females Independent Samples
Test
316C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Job Satisfaction
Between Groups
2.201
10
.220
.827
.604
Within Groups
17.828
67 .266
Total
20.029
77
Person organization
Between Groups 1.332 10 .133 .527 .865 Within Groups 16.926 67 .253 Total
18.258
77
Person job
Between Groups
3.827
10
.383
1.297
.250
Within Groups
19.771
67
.295
Total 23.598 77
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F
Sig.
T
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Difference
Std. Error Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Job Satisfaction
Equal variances assumed
1.375 .245 -1.839 76 .070 -.21500 .11690 -.44784 .01784
The Nexus of Person Organization Fit and Person Job Fit to Job Satisfaction: A Case...
Table 4: It Shows Whether Job Satisfaction Varies Among Males and Females Independent Sample
Test.
4.6 Regression and Correlation Analysis
Correlation analysis was carried out to know how much of the job satisfaction was related with the two
variables that is Person organization fit and person job fit (See tables 6). Results of the Regression
Analysis were insignificant and indicate that the independent variables that is Person job fit and
Person organization fit were not affecting dependent variable that is Job Satisfaction in any way.
CORRELATIONS Table 6: Correlation Analysis of the Variables
However, Person organization fit and Person job fit were found to be positively and moderately
correlated (r=.517, sig=.000) with each other.
After the overall insignificant correlation, correlation was run for each Institute separately and found
that only in case of one Institute Person job fit and Job Satisfaction (r=.551, sig=.039) and Person
organization fit and Job Satisfaction (r=.651, sig=.015) had positive and moderate correlations. See
table 7.
317 C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Job Satisfaction
Person job
Person organization
Pearson Correlation
Job Satisfaction
1.000
.018
.061
Person job .018 1.000 .517 Person organization .061 .517 1.000
Sig. (1-tailed) Job Satisfaction
.
.437
.298
Person job
.437
.
.000
Person organization .298 .000 .
Tufail et al.
aCORRELATIONS Table 7: Correlation Analysis of Institute A
a. Selecting only cases for which Colleges, Universities = institute A. N= 11.
ANOVAb,c
a. Predictors: (Constant), Person organization, Person job b. Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction c. Selecting only cases for which Colleges, Universities = Institute A
Coefficientsa,b
a. Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction b. Selecting only cases for which Colleges, Universities = Institute A
After the analysis of the data it is concluded that all the results are insignificant except for one university, which indicate that both the independent variables that is Person organization and Person job fits have no effect on the dependent variable that is Job Satisfaction. A study by Lauver and Kristof (2001) investigated the same variables and found that both have impact on job satisfaction but unique and different from one another. The difference in the results of this study and that of the Lauver and Kristof might be the result of other factors. The data gathering tool used in the study was self- reporting. And people are usually reluctant to give actual information about their own behaviour due to different reasons. Social desirability might be one of those reasons which restrict the respondents to reply honestly to the questions. In this context self-report biasness can be seen as a major factor which might have distorted the results of this study. Another big factor which can be held responsible for the difference in results, from the study of Lauver and Kristof, might be culture. According to Hofstede (1993) management theories apply differently to people from different cultures. Lauver and Kristof (2010) conducted the research in America which
318C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Job Satisfaction
Person job
Person organization
Pearson Correlation
Job Satisfaction
1.000
.551
.481
Person job .551 1.000 .651 Person organization .481 .651 1.000
Sig. (1-tailed)
Job Satisfaction
.
.039
.067
Person job
.039
.
.015
Person organization .067 .015 .
Model Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square F
Sig.
Regression .405 2 .203 1.967 .202a
Residual .824 8 .103
Total 1.229
10
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 2.097 .709 2.957 .018 Person job
.235
.217
.413
1.083
.311
Person organization .196 .352 .212 .557 .593
The Nexus of Person Organization Fit and Person Job Fit to Job Satisfaction: A Case...
has a culture very much different from ours one, this might also be main reason that the results are not
similar of the two studies.
Extrinsic factors might be another reason for the insignificant results. The locality, where the study
was conducted, people may be valuing extrinsic factors that is money more than the intrinsic factors
such as Person job fit and Person organization fit. This indicates that people may have answered the
questions in accordance with their own perception of satisfaction. Thus, this might also be a
contributor to the insignificant results of the study.
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
Literautre suggests that misfit between person and job or person and organization has adverse effects
on the morale of the employees, the productivity of the organization, job performance, turnover
intentions, organizational commitment, job satisfaction to name some which imply the significant
role person organization fit and person job fit play in the success of the organization. Present study is
carried out with a sole intention to know its relationship with job satisfaction in our own region. With
the help of this study organizations will come to know the critical role person organization and person
job fit play in job satisfaction and will give due importance to them, person organization and person
job fit, during recruitment and selection processes. Although the results of this study are not
significant but this does not mean the person organization and person job fits do not have an effect on
Job Satisfaction. However, scarce research in this field in Pakistan indicates there is a lot of scope for
research in this area. This research will obviously help other researchers who want to conduct future
research in this area and will serve as guideline for them. Research should not be restricted only to
person organization and person job fits but other facets of person environment fit such as Person
Group fit, Person Vocation fit should also be studied and their relationships with Intent to Quit, Task
Performance, Job Satisfaction etc. should be ascertained.
CONCLUSION The findings of the research suggest that person organization and person job fits have no effect on the
Job Satisfaction. Except for one Institute that is the results indicate that the person organization and
person job fit have positive effect on job satisfaction. Some of the reasons responsible for the
insignificant results might be: Social Desirability, Cultural Differences, choice of instrument,
Extrinsic Factors and sample size. The study was carried out in the educational institutions (colleges
and universities) of Peshawar KPK Pakistan. Since person organization and person job fit are
attaining more and more attention in the research arena, having results contrary to the literature and
point to ponder. Further research is needed to know if these findings prevail in others ectots and parts
of the country and region. Further is so, then why is the next big question. Also one needs to address
what to do if these fits do not affect employees. Research should not be restricted only to person
organization and person job fits but other facets of person environment fit such as Person Group fit,
Person Vocation fit should also be studied and their relationships with Intent to Quit, Task
Performance, Job Satisfaction should be ascertained.
319 C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Tufail et al.
REFERENCES Becker, T. E., & Billings, R. S. (1993). Profiles of commitment: An empirical test. Journal of
Organizational , 177–190. Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of applied psychology,
35(5), 307. Cable, D., & Judge, T. (September, 1996). Person–Organization Fit, Job Choice Decisions,.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , pp. 294–311. Caldwell, D. F., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1990). Measuring person–job fit with a profile-comparison.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 75 , 648–657. Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., & Walker, O. C. ((Nov., 1976)). Organization Climate and Job
Satisfaction in The Sales Force. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 13, No. 4 , 323-332. Davis-Blake, A., & Pfeffer, J. (1989). Just a mirage: The search for dispositional effects in
organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 385-400. Downes, P. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., Judge, T. A., & Darnold, T. C. (2017). Motivational mechanisms
of self-concordance theory: Goal-specific efficacy and person–organization fit. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(2), 197-215.
Edwards, J. R. (1991). Person–job fit: A Conceptual Integration, Literature Review, and Methodological Critique. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6, 283–357.
Ehrhart, K. (2006). Job Characteistics Beliefs and Personality as Antecendents of Subjective Person- job Fit. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21, 193-226.
Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of applied psychology,87(3), 565.
Funder, D. C. (2006). Towards a resolution of the personality triad: Persons, situations, and behaviors. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(1), 21-34.
Han, T. S., Chiang, H. H., McConville, D., & Chiang, C. L. (2015). A longitudinal investigation of person–organization fit, person–job fit, and contextual performance: The mediating role of psychological ownership. Human Performance, 28(5), 425-439.
Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. The Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 81-94.
Ilies, R., & Judge, T. A. (2004). An experience-sampling measure of job satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13 (3) , 367–389.
Jansen, K. J., & Kristof, A. ( 2006). Toward a Multidimensional Theory of Person- Environment Fit. Journal of Managerial Issues vol. Xviii Number , 193-212.
Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1994). Individual differences in the nature of the relationship between job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational , 101–107.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Erez, A., & Locke, E. A. (2005). Core Self-Evaluations and Job and Life Satisfaction: The Role of. Journal of Applied Psychology Vol. 90, No. 2 , 257–268.
Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, J. R. (1995). An Empirical Investigation of the Predicators of Executive Career Success. Personnel Psychology , 485-519.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 3 , 530–541.
320C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
The Nexus of Person Organization Fit and Person Job Fit to Job Satisfaction: A Case...
June, S., & Mahmood, R. (2011). The Relationship between Person-job Fit and Job Performance: A
Study among the Employees of the Service Sector SMEs in Malaysia. International Journal
of Business, Humanities and Technology Vol. 1 No. 2 .
June, S., & Mahmood, R. (2011). The Relationship between Person-job Fit and Job Performance: A
Study among the Employees of the Service Sector SMEs in Malaysia. International Journal
of Business, Humanities and Technology Vol. 1 No. 2 .
Kalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work Values and Job Rewards: A Theory of Job Satisfaction. American
Sociological Review , Vol. 42 , 124-143.
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person–organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations,
measurement, and Implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, , 1-49.
Kristof, B., Jansen, K. J., & Colbert, A. (2002). A Pohcy-captunng Study of the Simultaneous Effects
of Fit with Jobs, Groups, and Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (5) , 985-993.
Kristof-Brown, A. (2000). Perceived Applicant Fit: Distinguishing Between Recruiters' Perception of
Person-Job and Person organization fit . Personnel Psychology .
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Lauver, K. J., & Kristof, A. (2001). Distinguishing between Employees' Perceptions of Person job and
Person organization Fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior 59 , 454–470.
Law, K. S., Wong, C., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). "Toward a Taxonomy of Multidi- mensional
Constructs. Academy of Management Review 23 , 741-755.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.). Handbook ,
1297 – 1349.
O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwel, D. F. (1991). "People and Organi- zational Culture: A Profile
Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organ- ization Fit.". Academy of Management
Journal 34 , 487-516.
Robert D. Bretz, J., & Judge, T. A. (1992). The Relationship Between Person-Organization Fit and
Career Success. Working Paper 92. 11 .
Saari, L. M., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Employee Attitudes and Job Satisfaction. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. (1997). A longitudinal investigation of the relationships between job.
Personnel Psychology, 50 , 395–426.
Sekiguchi, T. (2004). Person-Organization Fit and Person-Job Fit in Employee Selection: A Review of
the Literature. Osaka Keidai Ronshu Vol. 54, No.6 .
Shane, S. A., Herold, D. M., & House, R. J. (1996). Situational Determinism-One Step Forward, Two
Steps Back?.
Silverthrone, C. (2004). "The impact of organizational culture and person-organization fit on
organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwan". Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol.25 , 592-599.
Tziner. (1987). Congruency issue resettled using Finean's achievement climate notion,. Social
Behavior and Personality, 2(1) , 63–78.
Venkatesh, V., Windeler, J. B., Bartol, K. M., & Williamson, I. O. (2017). Person–organization and
person–job fit perceptions of new IT employees: Work outcomes and gender differences.
Management Information Systems Quarterly, 41(2), 525-558.
Yen, W., & Ok, C. (2011). Effects of Person-Job Fit and Person-Organization Fit on Work.
Yoav, G. (1998). Intelligence and Job Satisfaction. The Academyof Management Journal , 526-539.
321 C 2018 CURJ, CUSIT
Tufail et al.
Y
