Po Fit vs Pj Fit
Person-Job Fit Vs Person-Organization Fit
In partial fulfillment of requirement of the subject:
TBS903 Managing People In Organizations
Summer 2 Semester
By
Reji George (Student ID: 3759052)
Submitted to
Dr. Payyazhi Jayashree
Submission Date: Tuesday, 24th Aug, 2010
INDEX
Abstract
ABSTRACT
This report reviews the recent developments of the research on Person-Organization fit (P-O) and Person-Job fit (P-J). These are the two most extensively studied fits in context of employee selection. In this report the concepts of P-O & P-J have been discussed reaching a conclusion that P-J fit is considered important during the earlier stages (screening stage) of selection whereas P-O fit is a necessity in later stages (interviews etc) of selection process of an employee.
INTRODUCTION
The theory of Person-Environment (PE) assumes that positive responses occur when individuals tend to fit or match the environment. For example, When a good fit exists in between person & environment, PE fit theories of vocational choice propose occurrence of high satisfaction, mental & physical well-being when there is good fit (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1997). Extensive research supports the proposition that individuals are satisfied with and adjust most easily to jobs that are congruent with their own career-relevant personality types. PE-fit is conceptualized as a general term, under which fall more specific notions of fit. In the recruitment and selection domain, two common forms of fit identified are 1. Person-Job Fit
This is a match between an individual & requirements of a specific job. Companies often pursue that person-job fit so as to match the applicant’s knowledge and skills to the requirements of specific job openings and focus on an applicant’s ability to perform right away without any training.
2. Person-Organization Fit
This is match between an individual & broader organizational attributes.
Companies while pursuing
In partial fulfillment of requirement of the subject:
TBS903 Managing People In Organizations
Summer 2 Semester
By
Reji George (Student ID: 3759052)
Submitted to
Dr. Payyazhi Jayashree
Submission Date: Tuesday, 24th Aug, 2010
INDEX
Abstract
ABSTRACT
This report reviews the recent developments of the research on Person-Organization fit (P-O) and Person-Job fit (P-J). These are the two most extensively studied fits in context of employee selection. In this report the concepts of P-O & P-J have been discussed reaching a conclusion that P-J fit is considered important during the earlier stages (screening stage) of selection whereas P-O fit is a necessity in later stages (interviews etc) of selection process of an employee.
INTRODUCTION
The theory of Person-Environment (PE) assumes that positive responses occur when individuals tend to fit or match the environment. For example, When a good fit exists in between person & environment, PE fit theories of vocational choice propose occurrence of high satisfaction, mental & physical well-being when there is good fit (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1997). Extensive research supports the proposition that individuals are satisfied with and adjust most easily to jobs that are congruent with their own career-relevant personality types. PE-fit is conceptualized as a general term, under which fall more specific notions of fit. In the recruitment and selection domain, two common forms of fit identified are 1. Person-Job Fit
This is a match between an individual & requirements of a specific job. Companies often pursue that person-job fit so as to match the applicant’s knowledge and skills to the requirements of specific job openings and focus on an applicant’s ability to perform right away without any training.
2. Person-Organization Fit
This is match between an individual & broader organizational attributes.
Companies while pursuing
References: 1. “Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology” Publication Date 01 Sept, 2005. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4790451/Person-job-fit-versus-person.html 2 3. Holland, J.L. (1997). Making vocational choices (Third Edition) : A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assesment Resources, Inc. 4. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology. 40, 437-454. 5. Edwards J.R. (1991) Person-Job fit : A conceptual integration, literature view, and methodological critique. In C.L Cooper & I.T Roberstson (Eds.), International review of industrial & organizational research. Vol. 6, 283-357. New York: Wiley. 6. Edwards J.R. (1993). Problems with the use profile similarity indices in the study of congruence in organizational research. Personnel Psychology, 46, 641-665. 7. Edwards J.R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behaviour research: Critique and a proposed alteranative. Organizational Behaviour & Human Decision Processes, 58, 51-100. 8. Werbel, J.D., & Gilliland, S.W. (1999). Person –environment fit in selection process. In Ferris G.R. (Ed.) Research in Personnel an Human Resource Management, Vol 17, 209-243. Stanford CT: JAI Press. 9. O’Reilly, C.A. III, & Chatman, J. (1986). Organization commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocial behaviour, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499 10 11. Kristof –Brown , A.L. (2000). Perceived applicant fit: Distinguishing between recruiter’s perceptions of Person-Job and person-organization fit. Personnel Psychology, 53 (4), 643-671. 12. Krsitof –Brown, A.L. (1996). Person-organisation fit: An integrative review of its conceptulaizations, measurment, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49 (1), 1-49. 13. Borman, W..C. & Motowildo, S.J. (1993). Expanding the criterian domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt & W.C. Borman (EDs), Personnel Selection in organizations (pp. 71-98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 14. Brousseau, K.R (1984). Job-Person dynamics and career development. In B.M staw & L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational behaviour, Greewich, CT: Vol. 2, pp. 125-154, JAI Press PJ