Abstract Person-environment (PE) fit is simply defined as the match between an individual and the environment. PE-fit fit has proven to be an important predictor of work related outcomes. A...Show moreAbstract Person-environment (PE) fit is simply defined as the match between an individual and the environment. PE-fit fit has proven to be an important predictor of work related outcomes. A Perceived Person-Environment Fit Scale is developed, which distinguishes four dimensions of PE-fit. Therefore the present research has investigated two of those dimensions in relation to work related outcomes. The present research has examined the relation between person-organization (PO) fit and person-group (PG) fit with the work related outcomes job satisfaction and turnover intention. Furthermore, it was examined whether the strength of those relations is influenced by the individual cultural values uncertainty avoidance and collectivism. In addition, it was also tested whether job satisfaction positively mediates the negative effect of PO-fit and PG-fit on turnover intention. To examine these effects an online survey study was conducted among the general Dutch working population (N = 163). The analyses were performed with IBM SPSS Statistics 28. It was predicted and found that PO-fit has a positive effect on job satisfaction and a negative effect on turnover intention, the negative effect on turnover intention was also mediated by job satisfaction. Furthermore, it was also predicted and found that PG-fit has a positive effect on job satisfaction. However, a relation between PG-fit and turnover intention was not found and neither was the mediating effect of uncertainty avoidance and collectivism found. The findings of this research are interesting for organizations. The relations found between the PE-fit dimensions with job satisfaction and turnover intention can be used strategically. By improving employees’ PO-fit and PG-fit job satisfaction can be enhanced and turnover intention reduced.Show less
Literature has demonstrated that power can be construed as a responsibility or as an opportunity. However, a better understanding is needed on how gender roles influence power construal. This study...Show moreLiterature has demonstrated that power can be construed as a responsibility or as an opportunity. However, a better understanding is needed on how gender roles influence power construal. This study investigated whether diverse gender identities tend to construe power differently. Furthermore, it also explored whether culture orientation – individualism and collectivism – and socioeconomic status influence the relationship between gender and power construal. It was hypothesized that: gender would not influence power construal; that individualism predicts power construed as an opportunity, and collectivism as a responsibility; and finally, that higher scores in objective and subjective measures of socioeconomic status led to power appraised as an opportunity. To test these hypotheses, gender was measured with a continuous variable. Culture orientation was assessed with four dimensions of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Lastly, objective and subjective socioeconomic status was measured by age, education, household income, and by the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status. The results demonstrated that a stronger feminine identification was associated with a stronger tendency to construe power as a responsibility. Findings concerning culture orientation and socioeconomic status confirmed the predictions. Age was also revealed as a significant predictor of power as an opportunity. The results regarding gender were interpreted in terms of social identification. Results on culture and socioeconomic status were discussed in terms of how these constructs serve as relevant social identities influencing the construal of power. Although more research is needed, the results highlight the importance of assuming power construal within specific social and economic contexts.Show less
