Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011) 315–320

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Vocational Behavior

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r.com/ locate / jvb

Relationships between various person–environment fit types and employeewithdrawal behavior: A longitudinal study☆

Jinkook Tak⁎Kwangwoon University, Department of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 447-1, Wolgye-Dong Nowon-Ku, Seoul, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o

☆ The present research has been conducted by the⁎ Fax: +82 2 941 9214.

E-mail address: tak@kw.ac.kr.

0001-8791/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc.doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2010.11.006

a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 1 September 2010Available online 8 November 2010

This study investigated the relationships between various person–environment fit types andemployees' withdrawal attitudes and behaviors. I collected an initial survey data from 901employees who had been with their organizations for 6 months at most and whose currentorganizations were their first employers. Of these respondents, only 297 responded to thesecond survey, 6 months after the first. The results showed person–job, person–supervisor, andperson–organization fits correlated significantly with turnover intention on the first survey.Logistic regression analyses showed only person–organization fit correlated significantly withactual turnover at the time of Survey 2. I discuss implications and limitations of this study.

© 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:Person–environment fitPerson–job fitPerson–supervisor fitPerson–organization fitTurnover intentionActual turnover

Researchers have found that various person–environment (PE) fits, such as person–job (PJ), person–supervisor (PS), andperson–organization (PO), correlated significantly with organizational outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, performance, organiza-tional commitment, or turnover intention, Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). Although studies have distinguishedthese different fit types as distinct concepts, there is little empirical evidence indicating how these different fit types correlate withimportant individual outcomes. In particular, few studies have investigated the relationships between various PE fit types andactual turnover. This study aimed to examine the relationships among various PE fit types (PJ, PS, and PO), turnover intention, andactual turnover.

Most past research focused on only one PE fit type without controlling for the others. Since, in reality, employees interact withtheir jobs, supervisors, and organizations on a daily basis, simultaneously assessing the effects of these three PE fit types on bothwithdrawal attitude and behavior provides a more realistic explanation of their relative influences.

The concept of PE fit

The concept of PE fit has long been prevalent in the vocational behavior literature (e.g., Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1985)as well as the management literature (e.g., Edwards, 1991; Kristof, 1996). Among the various types of PE fit, researchers havefocused on PO fit and PE fit (Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001). Also concerning the relationships between PE fit and various outcomesat work, researchers have extensively studied job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intent to quit, and performance(Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Less study has been conducted on other domain of referents such as a supervisor and other domain ofwork outcomes such as actual turnover.

One of the primary theories on PE fit perspective is Dawis and Lofquist's (1984) theory of work adjustment (TWA). ConcerningPE fit, basic assumption is that individuals seek out environment that are congruent with their characteristics. According to TWA,individuals “inherently seek to achieve and to maintain correspondence with their environments,” where correspondence is

Research Grant of Kwangwoon University in 2009.

All rights reserved.

316 J. Tak / Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011) 315–320

defined as a “harmonious relationship between the individual and the environment” (Lofquist & Dawis, 1991, p. 18, 22). A secondassumption of PE fit theories is that the degree of fit between individuals and environments is related to important outcomes (e.g.,job choice, job satisfaction, performance, turnover) for both the individuals and environments.

There have been arguments on the concept of PE fit. One dimension of complex concept of PE fit is the needs–supplies versusdemands–abilities distinction (Kristof, 1996). Based on needs–supplies perspective, PE fit occurs when an environment fulfilsindividuals' needs, values or preferences. In contrast, from a demands–abilities perspective PE fit occurs when individuals have theabilities required to satisfy environmental demands.

Another dimension is the perceived (subjective) versus actual (objective) distinction. Perceived fit is defined as a directassessment of compatibility between P and E (Kristof, 1996). That is, it is conceptualized as the judgment that an individualfitswellin the environment. Perceived fit is typically measured by asking individuals to rate to what degree they believe PE fit exists. Incontrast, actual fit is defined as an indirect assessment through comparisons of separately rated P and E. That is, actualfit is typicallymeasured by asking individuals to rate separately individual and environmental characteristics and compare the characteristics.

In their meta-analysis, Kristof-Brown et al. (2005) have shown that within both PJ fit and PO fit, perceived fit had betterpredictability of a number of criteria (e.g. job satisfaction, intention to quit, organizational commitment, and performance) thanobjective fit had. Also, with regard to PJ fit, needs–supply fit had higher relationships with a number of criteria such as jobsatisfaction, organizational commitment, intent to quit, and performance than demand–ability fit had whereas within PO fit, therelationship was not consistent. Thus in this study PE fit is measured based on concepts of perceived fit and needs–supply.

Person–job fit

Edwards (1991) described two concepts of PJ fit, demand–ability fit and needs–supplies or supply–value fit. That is, PJ fitconcerns the compatibility between either the individual's abilities and the job's demands or the individual's needs/values and thejob's provision of these needs/values. Ameta-analysis (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005) found PJ fit correlated strongly with intention toquit (−.46). In the same study, PJ fit correlated moderately (−.28) with strain but weakly (−.08) with turnover itself.

In a sample of Korean employees, Choi and Yoo (2005) found PJ fit correlated strongly with turnover intention (r=−.56). Yooand Hyun (2003b) found PJ fit correlated strongly with turnover intention (r=−.49) as well as with other job-related attitudes,such as job satisfaction (r=.66) and job involvement (r=.67).

Person–organization fit

Kristof (1996) defined PO fits as “the compatibility between people and organizations that occurs when: (a) at least one entityprovides what the other needs, or (b) they share similar fundamental characteristics, or (c) both” (pp. 4–5). A number of studieshave examined the relationship between PO fit and turnover intention, but their results were inconsistent (Verquer, Beehr, &Wagner, 2003). The magnitudes of the correlations between PO fit and turnover intention ranged from −.12 (Vancouver &Schmitt, 1991) to −.63 (Cable & Judge, 1996).

In their meta-analysis (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005) PO fit had a moderate correlation with indicators of strain (−.27), a weakcorrelation with turnover (−.14), and a strong correlation with intention to quit (−.35). In another meta-analysis (Verquer et al.,2003) on the relationship between PO fit and work attitudes, PO fit had a moderate relationship with turnover intention (−.21).

Various studies based on Korean samples have found consistent and strong relationships between PO fit and turnover intentionand job satisfaction. In one sample of Korean employees, Yoo and Hyun (2003b) found PO fit correlated significantly with turnoverintention (r=−.50). Choi and Yoo (2005) also found PO fit correlated strongly with turnover intention (r=−.52). In addition, Leeand Lee (2006) found PO fit correlated significantly with job satisfaction (r=.30).

Person–supervisor fit

PS fit concerns the dyadic relationships between individuals and their supervisors. Studies on PS fit have examined followers–leaders value congruence (e.g., Meglino, Ravlin, & Adkins, 1992), subordinate–supervisor personality similarity (e.g., Bauer &Green, 1996 and Schaubroeck & Lam, 2002), and employee–manager goal congruence (e.g., Witt, 1998). Thus, PS fit concerns thematch between subordinates and supervisors that occurs when they share common characteristics.

Only a small number of studies have examined the relationships among PS fit and withdrawal attitude and behavior. In varioussamples of Korean employees, PS fit has consistently correlated with turnover intention, as well as with other job attitudevariables. In a study by Choi and Yoo (2005), using a sample of Korean employees, PS fit correlated significantly with turnoverintention (r=−.49). In another sample of Korean employees, Yoo and Hyun (2003a) found PS fit correlated significantly withemployees' satisfaction with, and trust in, supervisors. Additionally, in a sample of Korean newcomer employees, Lee and Lee(2006) found PS fit correlated significantly with job satisfaction (r=.31).

Comparisons of types of fit

Lauver and Kristof-Brown (2001) demonstrated that employees' perceptions of PJ and PO fits should be treated as distinctconcepts, arguing that PJ fit concerns an individual's compatibility with a specific job, whereas PO fit is relevant to an individual'smatch to an organization's values, goals, and mission.

317J. Tak / Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011) 315–320

Lee and Lee (2006) used three types of fit (person–organization, person–supervisor, and person–group) and a sample ofKorean employees to examine the relative importance of these fit types in explaining job satisfaction. The results of multipleregression analyses showed only person–group fit was significant.

Choi and Yoo (2005) hypothesized PS fit would be more important in explaining turnover intention than PO or PJ fit, based onKorean culture's emphasis on interpersonal relationships. Although all three fit types were significant in explaining turnoverintention, they found PJ fit was a little more important than either PO or PS fit.

With a sample of American employees, Lauver and Kristof-Brown (2001) hypothesized that PO fit would be a better predictorof intention to quit than PJ fit would be. The result supported this hypothesis, which they had based on Kristof's (1996) suggestionthat PJ fit should be more strongly correlated with work attitudes specific to the job (e.g., job satisfaction), and PO fit should bemore strongly correlated with work attitudes specific to the organization (e.g., organizational commitment and turnoverintention). Lauver and Kristof-Brown (2001) also argued that if an employee does not have a good fit with their job, then they canfind a different job in the current organization; whereas, if a person has a good fit with their job but not with the organization, thenthat personwill likely search for a similar jobwith a different organization. Using similar logic, when a person does not have a goodfit with their supervisor but does with the organization, then that person will likely seek a similar or different job in the currentorganization, to get away from the current supervisor and find a new one.

Therefore, the hypothesis for this study states that employees' perceptions of PO fit correlate more strongly with both turnoverintention and actual turnover than do perceptions of PJ or PS fit.

Method

Participants

Participants were 901 newcomer employees who had been with their organizations less than 6 months and whose currentorganizations were their first. I used an on-line survey to collect data. Newcomers who had registered at a big, on-line surveyorganization received emails asking them to log into a computer and complete the survey. I received first-survey responses from901 newcomers at various organizations. The second survey was distributed to 901 employees using their email address 6 monthsafter the first survey. The purpose of the survey was explained and they were asked to participate in courteous terms. Email wassent to them three times, but only 297 individuals responded. Although a gift certificate worth 5 dollar was guaranteed for theirreply, only 33% of individuals replied.

Of the 297, 80had left their organizations. The297 respondents contained156males (52.5%), aswell as 249 college graduates (83.8%),79 employees of large companies (26.6%). Permanent employees were 180 (60.6%) and temporary employees were 117 (39.4%). Theirmean age was 23.3 years (SD=2.75) and ranged from 19 to 30. With regard to the nature of the jobs, white collar employees were thelargest (116, 39.1%) and followed by technical employees (45, 15.2%), service employees (37, 12.5%), R&D employees (29, 9.8%), and etc.

Measures

This study is a part of a large study including many variables. Due to a large number of variables, I had to reduce the number ofitems for each of the variables in order to collect more data from respondents.

Person–job fitTo measure person–job fit, I selected 3 items, based on factor loading scores, from among the 11 items Choi and Yoo developed

(2005). Itemswith high factor loadingswere selected. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .84. An example of the 3items is “My job fits my interests.”

Person–organization fitPerson–organization fit was measured using 2 items from the 10 items developed by Choi and Yoo (2005). Items with high

factor loadings were selected. The Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .75. An example item is “I have characteristics in commonwith my organization.”

Person–supervisor fitPerson–supervisor fit was measured using 3 of the 10 items developed by Choi and Yoo (2005). Items with high factor loadings

were selected. The Cronbach's alpha for this scalewas .85. An example item is “I have characteristics in commonwithmy supervisor.”In order to examine whether the three types of fit are conceptually distinguished, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted

to assess the underlying dimensions of measures of PJ, PO, and PS fit. Analysis showed that the three-factor solution explained thedata very well. Each of the items belonged to a specific factor had the highest factor loading on the original factor. The three-factorsolution explained 78% of the total variance.

Turnover intentionTomeasure turnover intention, I developed 3 items for use in this study. An example item is “I amwilling to move to a different

company within 3 months.” The Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .91. The higher the score for these items is, the higher theperson's turnover intention.

318 J. Tak / Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011) 315–320

Actual turnoverActual turnover was measured 6 months after the first survey. Individuals responding to the second survey stated whether

they had since left their original organizations.

Analysis

To explain turnover intention, I conducted regression analyses, using the three types of fit as predictors, and also performed alogistic regression analysis, to predict turnover via the predictors of the three types of fit.

Results

As shown in Table 1, the three types of PE fit correlated moderately with each other, ranging from .42 (between PO and PS) to.54 (between PJ and PS). Company type was significantly related to both PO and PJ fit (r=.13 and .16, respectively), suggestingthat employees of big companies perceive higher PO and PS fits. Employment type had a significant relationship with PJ fit (r=−.13), suggesting that permanent employees had a higher PJ fit.

All three PE fit types correlated significantly with turnover intention. PJ, PO, and PS fit correlated significantly with turnoverintention (r=−.44, −.38, and −.21, respectively). Based on correlation analyses, PJ fit correlated with turnover intention morestrongly than did the other two types of fit.

Besides these three types of fit, company type correlated significantly with turnover intention (r=−.12), meaning thatemployees at small- andmedium-sized companies weremore likely to leave their organizations. Employment type also correlatedsignificantly with turnover intention (r=.20), suggesting that temporary employeesweremore likely to leave their organizations.

To examine the relative importance of the three fit types for explaining turnover intention, I entered various demographic andjob-related variables (education, sex, company type, and employment type) into the regression equations, as control variables.Table 2 shows all three fit types significantly predicted turnover intention at Time 1. Overall, PJ fit was a little more important forexplaining withdrawal attitudes than were PO or PS fit.

Table 3 shows the results of logistic regression analyses of the various fit types at Time 1 in relation to actual turnover at Time 2.After controlling for various types of demographic and job-related variables, only PO fit was marginally significant for explainingactual turnover (pb .06). This partly supported the hypothesis.

Discussion

This study aimed to examine the relationships among various types of PE fit, turnover intention, and actual turnover. In thisstudy, PJ fit correlated moderately with PO fit (r=.44). This result is not consistent with the findings of Lauver and Kristof-Brown(2001), which found a weak correlation (r=.18) between the two fits. However, it is similar to the result Choi and Yoo (2005)found for Korean employees (r=.58). Generally, the magnitudes of the intercorrelations among the three fit types in this studywere similar to those Choi and Yoo (2005) found for their Korean sample.

This study shows that various PE fit types are significantly related to turnover intention and confirms the previous studies onthe relationships between various PE fit types and turnover intention (Choi & Yoo, 2005; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Overall, PJ fitcorrelated more strongly with withdrawal attitudes than did PO or PS fit. Hierarchical regression analysis also showed that PJ fitwas a slightly stronger turnover intention predictor than other PE fit types were. This result is consistent with the Choi and Yoo(2005) study's findings, which showed that PJ fit had the strongest correlation with turnover intention. However, this result is notconsistent with the study by Lauver and Kristof-Brown (2001), which found that PO fit had a stronger impact on intention to quitthan PJ fit had. With respect to the relationship of PE fit to withdrawal behavior, only PO fit correlated significantly with actualturnover. Since PJ fit wasmore important for explaining withdrawal attitudes than PO or PS fit while PO fit wasmore important forexplaining withdrawal behavior, the hypothesis was partly supported.

Table 1Means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of study variables.

Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Gender 1.47 .502. Education 1.91 .39 −.053. Company type 1.27 .44 −.07 .13 ⁎

4. Employment type 1.39 .49 .10 −.19 ⁎ −.115. PO fit 3.09 .72 −.06 .03 .13 ⁎ −.086. PS fit 2.80 .72 −.09 −.04 .11 −.04 .42 ⁎⁎

7. PJ fit 3.02 .76 −.07 .03 .16 ⁎ −.13 ⁎ .44 ⁎⁎ .54 ⁎⁎

8. Turnover intention 2.54 1.10 0.9 −.09 −.12 ⁎ .20 ⁎ −.38 ⁎⁎ −.21 ⁎⁎ −.44 ⁎⁎

Note: Sex (1=Male; 2=Female); Education (1=High school graduate; 2=College graduate; 3=At or above Master's program); Company type (1=Small ormedium company; 2=Large company); Employment type (1=Permanent employees ; 2=Temporary employees).⁎ pb .05.⁎⁎ pb .01.

Table 2Hierarchical regression analyses' results for relationships between PE fit and turnover intention.

Variables Turnover intention Turnover intention

Beta Beta

Step 1 Step 2Education −.02 PO fit −.17 ⁎⁎

Sex .02 PS fit .19 ⁎⁎

Company type −.11 ⁎⁎ PJ fit −.24 ⁎⁎

Employment type .09 ⁎⁎

⁎⁎ pb .01.

Table 3Logistic regression analyses' results for effects of various PE fit types on turnover.

Variable B Wald Sig Exp(B)

Step 1Education .37 1.10 .294 1.449Sex −.14 7.92 .619 .872Company type .27 .73 .393 1.307Employment type .79 .25 .005 2.199

Step 2PO fit −.42 3.71 .054 .658PS fit −.19 .65 .420 .828PJ fit −.10 .19 .666 .909

319J. Tak / Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011) 315–320

The result that PJ fit had a stronger relationship with turnover intention than PO and PS fit may be interpreted in Korean culturalperspective. In Korea, many organizations are used to recruit applicants on a regular base such as twice a year. Also theorganizations do not providemuch information on the specific jobs. The organizations provide information only on the broad areaswhere the specific job belongs such as human resource management or marketing. So, many applicants who applied jobs may notknow exactly what they need to do after getting into the position. After newcomers are accepted into the specific job and find outthat the job is not what they wanted, they may be disappointed with the organization which did not provide the concreteinformation on the job and consequently have intentions to leave the organization.

The result in this study indicates that, when a newcomer perceives their job does not fit their individual characteristics, they aremore likely to think about leaving the organization. However, when the person makes a final decision on leaving the organization,the most influential factor is PO fit. As hypothesized, when a person is not satisfied with their job or supervisor, they can perhapsget away from their current job or supervisor by changing jobs within the organization. However, when the person does not havecharacteristics in common with the organization, they are more likely to leave the organization.

A plausible interpretation of these results concerns a process between PJ fit and PO fit. With regard to interactions betweenindividuals and types of referents, such as jobs and organizations, individuals in reality have more direct interactions with theirjobs than with their organizations. Due to these frequent interactions, an individual will likely find out at the beginning whethertheir job matches them. Then, they will likely think about their match with the organization. Thus, a newcomer possibly perceiveswhether their job is compatible with them to start with, and, if the fit is poor, the individual then thinks about leaving theorganization. When the individual perceives the poor organizational fit later, their intention to leave the organization intensifies,and they finally leave the organization. Future research needs to test this hypothetical process model.

One strength of this study is the inclusion of three types of fit in the same study. Most past research has assessed only one ortwo types of fit without, controlling for the other(s), in explaining turnover intention. In addition, this study is the first to examinethe effects of various PE fit types on actual turnover, using longitudinal data.

A second study strength is the results' generalizability across jobs and organizations. Since the study respondents wereemployees who had registered at a big, on-line survey organization, the data drew from a wide variety of jobs and organizations.However, since all the respondents were newcomers who had been with their organizations no more than 6 months, the study'sgeneralizability to experienced employees is limited.

Practical implications of the study's results are as follows. Since all three fit types correlated significantly with turnoverintention, managers need to focus on various fit types in order to retain employees. First, managers need to distinguish among thethree fit types. Based on this understanding, they need to find out whether their subordinates have poor fit in one or more of thethree types. In particular, they need to understand that, when employees have poor PO fit, they are likely considering whether toleave the organization and are likely to finally leave. To improve PO fit, the organization needs to put emphasis on selecting peoplewhose values and philosophies best match the organization.

Second, managers should focus on employee selection. Mitchell, Holtom, and Lee (2001) argued that, in order to retainemployees, a company needs to hire employees based on their fit with the job and with the organizational culture and values.Mitchell et al. also proposed that employers need to provide employees with opportunities to fit their jobs. Job rotation and/or job

320 J. Tak / Journal of Vocational Behavior 78 (2011) 315–320

transfers should be effective for increasing PJ fit. To facilitate this type of opportunity, employers need to accept the fact that onejob fits one individual. Job transfers can effectively reduce problems caused by poor PJ fit. Realistic job previews can also beeffective for increasing PJ fit. When newcomers receive accurate and concrete information on their prospective jobs, they will beunsurprised by their actual jobs after getting into the organization. In one sample of Korean employees, Tak (2007) demonstratedthat realistic job previews increased PJ fit.

To increase PS fit, supervisors and/or managers should try to understand employees' personalities and needs. They need torespect employees' distinct characteristics and encourage them to display their potential.

Third, employers should focus on newcomers' socialization processes. Bauer, Morrison, and Callister (1998) suggested that, toincrease the match between newcomers and their jobs, as well as between newcomers and the organization, employers shoulddesign training to emphasize knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes.

Finally, concerning the application of PE fit to socialization research, PE fit could be a useful measure of newcomer adjustment.Bauer, Bodner, Erdogan, Truxvillo, and Tucker (2007) tested a model of newcomer-adjustment antecedents and outcomes duringorganizational socialization. They proposed that newcomer information-seeking and organizational socialization tactics influencenewcomer adjustment, which influences a number of outcomes (e.g., performance and turnover). They included role clarity, self-efficacy, and social acceptance as measures of newcomer adjustment, adapting these measures from the three aspects Feldman(1981) proposed, comprising resolution of role demands, task mastery, and adjustment to one's group. The three fit types in thisstudy can serve as measures of newcomer adjustment. First, social acceptance is conceptually similar to PS fit. When PS fit is high,supervisors and/or managers accept their employees. Role clarity appears to be insufficient to represent adjustment to the job.Although newcomers knowwhat to do on their jobs, they might have not adjusted to their jobs if they find the jobs incompatible.Thus rather than role-clarity, PJ fit can serve as a better measure of newcomer adjustment. Additionally, PO fit can serve as anothermeasurement of authentic adjustment.

Future research needs to focus more on antecedents of the fit three types to increase each fit, consequently leading toreductions in turnover intention and actual turnover. Most of research on PE fit has focused on the consequences of the various PEfit types (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005).

This study only includes employees' withdrawal attitudes and behaviors. Future research needs to include other work outcomevariables (e.g., performance and mental health) as longitudinal data, to improve understanding regarding the roles of various fittypes.

References

Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxvillo, D. M., & Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review ofantecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 707−721.

Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1996). Development of leader–member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1538−1567.Bauer, T. N., Morrison, E. W., & Callister, R. B. (1998). Organizational socialization: A review and directions for future research. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in

personnel and human resources management, Vol. 16. (pp. 149−214)Stamford, CT: JAI Press.Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Person–organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67,

294−311.Choi, M., & Yoo, T. (2005). The effects of person–organization, person–job, and person–supervisor fit on organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover

intention: The focus on interaction effects among three types of fit. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 18, 139−162.Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Edwards, J. R. (1991). Person–job fit: A conceptual integration, literature on review and methodological critique. International Review of Industrial and

Organizational Psychology, 6, 283−357.Feldman, D. C. (1981). The multiple socialization of organization members. Academy of Management Review, 6, 309−318.Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocational choices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person–organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurements, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 50, 359−394.Kristof-Brown, A., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals' fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization,

person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281−342.Lauver, K. J., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2001). Distinguishing between employees' perceptions of person–job and person–organization fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior,

59, 454−470.Lee, B., & Lee, K. (2006). The differences of the effect of various levels of person–environment fit on job satisfaction. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, 19, 285−300.Lofquist, L., & Dawis, R. V. (1991). Essentials of person–environment correspondence counseling. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Meglino, B. O., Ravlin, E. C., & Adkins, C. L. (1992). The measurement of work value congruence: A field study comparison. Journal of Management, 18, 33−43.Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., & Lee, T. W. (2001). How to keep your best employees: Developing an effective retention policy. Academy of Management Executive, 15,

96−108.Schaubroeck, J., & Lam, S. S. K. (2002). How similarity to peers and supervisor influences organizational advancement in different culture. Academy of Management

Journal, 45, 1120−1136.Tak, J. (2007). Antecedents of person–job fit and its relation to intention to leave: Based on a sample of newcomers. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, 20, 459−473.Yoo, T., & Hyun, H. (2003a). The application of polynomial regression and response surface methodology to person–environment fit research. Korean Journal of

Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16, 1−19.Yoo, T., & Hyun, H. (2003b). Effects of the fit of current-ideal organizational personality and the fit of current-ideal job characteristics on the attitudes toward the

organization and job. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16, 201−222.Vancouver, J. B., & Schmitt, N. W. (1991). An exploratory examination of person–organization fit: Organizational goal congruence. Personnel Psychology, 44,

333−352.Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., &Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person–organization fit and work attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior,

63, 473−489.Witt, L. A. (1998). Enhancing goal congruence: A solution to organizational politics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 666−674.