Next Article in Journal
Outcomes of Establishing an Urgent Care Centre in the Same Location as an Emergency Department
Previous Article in Journal
Sustaining Language Skills Development of Pre-Service EFL Teachers despite the COVID-19 Interruption: A Case of Emergency Distance Education
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 12
Issue 19
10.3390/su12198189
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit between Person-Organisation Fit and Intention to Leave the Job: Empirical Evidence from Pakistan

by
Roselina Ahmad Saufi
1,
Nur Naha Abu Mansor
2,
Abdul Samad Kakar
2,* and
Harcharanjit Singh
2
1
Faculty of Entrepreneurship and Business, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Pengkalan Chepa 16100, Malaysia
2
Azman Hashim International Business School, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai 54100, Malaysia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(19), 8189; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198189
Submission received: 14 September 2020 / Revised: 26 September 2020 / Accepted: 30 September 2020 / Published: 4 October 2020
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The turnover of faculty members is a pressing problem that has adversely affected the performance and productivity of higher education institutions. The purpose of this study is to examine the direct effect of person-organisation fit (POF) and person-job fit (PJF) on faculty members’ turnover intentions. Furthermore, the study explores the mediating role of PJF between POF and turnover intention. Data collected from faculty members of public sector colleges (n = 250) were analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling. The results, contrary to our expectations, revealed that POF is not a significant predictor of faculty turnover intention. However, the results provided support for the negative relationship between PJF and turnover intention. Additionally, as predicted, the results confirmed that PJF mediates the relationship between POF and turnover intention. The findings also revealed that the reliability and validity of the adopted/adapted scales change in the context of different countries and organisational settings. The theoretical and practical implications, research limitations and directions for future research are provided.

1. Introduction

Over the years, the turnover of faculty members has been the focus of discussion among practitioners and researchers. This is because the turnover of faculty members is disruptive and costly to the organisation, involving both monetary and non-monetary costs. Schloss [1] reported that the cost of faculty turnover is $400,000 in the USA, which includes the cost of hiring and recruiting new faculty. In addition to monetary cost, high faculty turnover adversely affects organisation productivity [2], disrupts the quality of education, and impedes students’ learning and research activities [3,4]. Moreover, the turnover of faculty members also reduces the motivation and morale of existing academics [4,5]. Thus, owing to the negative implications of academic faculty turnover, it is viable to investigate the factors that cause faculty members’ to consider leaving the job.
One of the factors that have been consistently linked with employees’ turnover intentions is person–organisation fit (POF). POF is defined as the extent to which employees’ personal values and goals are identical with the values and goals of the organisation [6]. When employees perceive compatibility between themselves and their organisation (i.e., POF), they become more attached to the organisation and intend to remain within the organisation [7,8,9]. Employees also exhibit job satisfaction [10], organisation commitment (OC) [11], and organisational citizenship behavior (OCB) [12,13] when they perceive a strong fit between themselves and an organisation. In contrast, poor POF results in negative work outcomes such as intent to leave the organisation [14,15,16].
Considering the indispensable role of POF, many researchers have explored it in various industrial settings, such as the health [14], insurance [17], and tourism industries [7]. Nevertheless, the concept of POF has received little attention in educational institutions (for an exception see, Jin et al. [9]. Jin et al. [9] conducted an empirical study among a sample of faculty members and found POF to have a significant negative effect on turnover intention. However, Jin et al. [9] conceptualised POF with values congruence only, whereas we use values and goals congruence to conceptualise POF, thus providing a more robust conceptualisation of fit.
Additionally, although the beneficial direct effect of POF cannot be undermined, researchers have called for further studies to explore the underlying mechanisms that may transform the influence of POF on turnover intention [9]. Prior scholars have explored a myriad of factors that may mediate the influence of POF on turnover intention. For instance, scholars tested whether the effects of POF on work outcomes were mediated by job satisfaction [18], job stress [15], OC [19], and work engagement [20]. Recently, person-job fit (i.e., congruence between an individual and his or her job’s characteristics) has received considerable attention as a mediating variable between employee attitudes, behaviours, and their respective antecedents [17,21]. However, previous research on the mediating role of person-job fit (PJF) between POF and turnover intention is limited. Thus, despite the extensive amount of studies on POF, further research into the underlying mechanisms that link POF and essential work outcomes, such as turnover intention, is needed.
Furthermore, current understanding of the causes and consequences of POF is based on research conducted in non-academic work settings. The values and goals of academic institutions are different to those of non-academic organisations; for example, educational institutions, especially public sector institutions, are non-profit seeking, while other organisations value profit. Therefore, the findings of studies conducted in non-academic work settings cannot be generalised to academic institutions. Additionally, the literature on POF is mostly dominated by studies from Western and developed countries, whereas only a few studies are available from Asia in general and Pakistan in particular. This omission is critical as several studies have shown that the findings of studies conducted in Western culture cannot be generalised in other cultural settings [12,22]. For example, in a cross-cultural empirical study on fit, Astakhova [23] found a significant and positive relationship between person-supervisor fit and OC in Japan; however, the same relationship was insignificant in the USA. Thus, it is worth exploring the role of cross-cultural differences on the implications of POF. This study is aimed to fill this gap in the literature by investigating the direct and indirect effect (through PJF) of POF on faculty members’ turnover intentions in the educational institutions of Pakistan.
In doing so, the study contributes to POF, PJF, and turnover intention literature in many ways. First, the study contributes to POF and PJF literature by investigating its impact on faculty members’ turnover intentions. Second, by examining PJF as a mediator, the study explores the psychological mechanisms underlying the influence of POF on turnover intention. Third, following Huang et al.’s [22] assertion that studies conducted in a Western context cannot be effective in different cultural settings, this study adds to the literature by investigating the implications of POF and PJF in the context of Pakistan. Fourth, by validating the measurement scales of POF and PJF in different cultural settings, this study also has methodological contributions.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Person-Organisation Fit and Person-Job Fit

POF has been conceptualised as the match between the individual and his or her organisation. POF can be measured using either person-organisation values fit, whereby individual values are compared to the organisation, or person-organisation goals fit, whereby employees’ goals and objectives are compared to the organisation [24,25]. On the other hand, person-job fit (PJF) is defined as the match between the person and job’s characteristics [26]. In other words, PJF occurs when the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) of a person are compatible with the job demands and resources (e.g., pay, fringe benefits, allowances, and working conditions), thus fulfilling the physiological and psychological needs and preferences of the employees.
Although POF and PJF are somewhat closely linked, the former puts much more emphasis on the congruence of a person with an organisation, while the latter emphasises the job’s characteristics. Lauver and Kristof-Brown [27] also sought to differentiate between the two concepts by establishing the associations of POF and PJF with important work outcomes such as turnover intention and job satisfaction. They observed that POF was significantly associated with organisational level outcomes, such as organisation commitment and performance, while PJF’s relationship with organisational outcomes (e.g., task performance) was weak. Additionally, the interrelationship between POF and PJF was also weak. These findings suggest that both POF and PJF are conceptually different from each other.
Irrespective of conceptual differences, POF and PJF are related to a number of outcomes, including OCB, OC [13,23], job satisfaction [28], career success and turnover intention [7,8,29].

2.2. Turnover Intention

Turnover intention is defined as the likelihood of leaving a job in the near future. It is considered to be the last stage of withdrawal cognition and a significant predictor of actual turnover [30,31]. In their meta-analysis study, Rubenstein et al. [32] found a positive and significant correlation of 0.56 between turnover intention and actual turnover. Despite significant correlation between the two, turnover intention and actual turnover are theoretically and conceptually different from each other. For instance, actual turnover is time-specific and represents the physical separation of employees from an organisation [33], while turnover intention is subjective and reflects employees’ willingness to leave the job in the near future [34,35]. Additionally, in the literature, researchers have utilised intention as a proxy of actual turnover for a number of reasons. First, turnover intention is subjective and amenable to measures [36], while actual turnover is dichotomous and requires longitudinal data. Second, theories and literature suggest that intention is the single best predictor of actual turnover [32,37,38,39]. Hence, this study focuses on the turnover intention of faculty members.

3. Hypotheses Development

In this study, we hypothesise that POF relates positively to PJF and negatively to the turnover intention of academics. We draw on the Attraction-Selection-Attrition (ASA) model to justify the influence of POF on turnover intention [40]. Likewise, the relationship of POF with PJF is explained by spillover theory [41].
A core assumption of the ASA framework is that individuals are attracted to and selected by organisations whose members’ attributes, such as values, personality, and goals, are identical to their characteristics [40]. However, individuals who do not share identical characteristics with the organisation tend to quit the job [40]. There is also empirical evidence from non-academic work settings that people who do not feel compatible with the values and goals of the organisation quit the job. For instance, Vogel and Feldman [7], in an empirical study on employees working in restaurants, found that POF had a negative impact on turnover intention. Rurkkhum [42] showed that employees’ congruence with an organisation negatively influenced their intention to leave the job. Further, Andela and van der Doef [8], in an occupationally heterogeneous sample, found that POF was related negatively to turnover intention. Along the same lines, Ribando and Evans [43] found a significant and negative relationship between POF and turnover intention among prospective employees in Georgia. Also, Jin et al. [9], in a study among academics in a public university in the United States, found that POF had a direct negative impact on turnover intention. However, they did not operationalise POF with values and goals congruence.
Following these theoretical and empirical arguments, we propose that:
Hypothesis H1.
Person-organisation fit is negatively related to intention to leave the job.

3.1. Person-Job and Turnover Intention

The ASA model can also be applied to explain the influence of PJF on turnover intention. As stated above, organisations not only look for employees who match their characteristics but also who possess the capabilities to meet the job requirements [25,26]. On the other hand, employees are interested in joining organisations whose resources are sufficient enough to meet their needs and preferences [18,44,45]. In simple words, employees prefer to stay with the organisation when their KSAs are adequate to meet the job’s requirements and the job supplies are sufficient to meet their needs and preferences. For example, Vogel and Feldman [7] found that restaurant workers were more willing to stay with the organisation when their KSAs were compatible with the job requirements and the job resources met their needs. Andela and van der Doef [8] also found that PJF had a negative influence on turnover intention. We expect similar results (in the context of higher education institutions (HEIs) and Pakistan) when it comes to the relationship between faculty members’ perception of PJF and turnover intention (i.e., a higher PJF will lead to lower faculty turnover intention).
Hypothesis H2.
PJF relates negatively to academics’ intention to leave the job.

3.2. Person-Organisation Fit and Person-Job Fit

We also propose that POF is positively related to PJF fit, and this relationship is explained by spillover theory. Spillover theory suggests that fit in one aspect may influence fit in another aspect [41]. When an individual experiences fit in one aspect, then it is likely that he or she may strive to modify other aspects that are a poor fit or misfit. For example, if an individual experiences strong fit with the job’s resources but poor fit with the job’s requirements, over time the individual is likely to reduce the misfit by either changing his abilities, knowledge, and skills to match the job requirements, or working to change the requirements of the job. Recent fit researchers also found that there is a positive spillover of fit in one aspect (e.g., POF) on needs-supplies fit and demands-abilities fit [18]. Boon and Biron [45] reported that, on the one hand, an individual with a higher degree of POF adapts, develops and applies his/her KSAs to match the job’s requirements; on the other hand, a higher degree of POF enables employees to communicate their needs, desires, preferences, and thoughts to organisations, so organisations can modify job supplies to meet employees’ needs and preferences. Hence, following spillover theory and related literature, we predict that a person with a higher degree of POF is likely to experience PJF.
Hypothesis H3.
POF is positively related to PJF.

3.3. Person-Job Fit as a Mediator

Thus far, we have suggested that high POF is likely to lower faculty turnover intention (Hypothesis 1) and enhance their perception of PJF (Hypothesis 3). We also predict that PJF relates negatively to turnover intention (Hypothesis 3). Given hypotheses 1–3, we posit that PJF mediates the influence of POF on intention to quit the job. In addition, scholars such as Boon and Biron [45] have observed that when employees feel compatible with the values and goals of the organisation, they tend to adapt or develop KSAs to meet the job requirements and convince the organisation to meet their needs and preferences. Accordingly, when employees believe their KSAs are compatible with job requirements, and job resources are adequate to meet their needs and preferences, they feel satisfied with the job and intend to remain within organisations [7,8,18,26]. In contrast, in the case of a poor match between an individual and job characteristics (i.e., a poorer PJF), adverse work outcomes such as stress, emotional exhaustion, and turnover intention will ensue [7,8,45]. Thus, we predict that a high perception of POF strengthens PJF and, in return, PJF reduces academics’ turnover intention; therefore, we propose that (Figure 1):
Hypothesis H4.
The impact of POF on turnover intention is mediated by PJF.

4. Research Design

4.1. Sample and Data Collection

The target respondents of this study were full-time academics in public sector colleges in Baluchistan, Pakistan. The sample size was calculated using Faul et al. [46] G*power 3.1.9.4 software. Using 0.15 effect size, (1-β) = 0.80 power, 0.05 significant level, and three predictors, the minimum required sample size for the study was 74. The sample from the population was drawn using convenience sampling, i.e., approaching participants that were easily accessible [47]. To elicit information from the sample, 450 questionnaires were self-administered among faculty members. Initially, 250 surveys were returned, indicating a response rate of 55%. Out of the 250 participants, 61% were male, and 39% were female. Participants were categorised into four groups according to their designation. Out of the 250 respondents, 72% (n = 180) were lecturers, 14.8 (n = 37) were assistant professors, and 8% (n = 20) were associate professors. Professors constitute only 5.2% (n = 13) of the sample. The average age of the respondents was 38 years (minimum age = 22 years, and maximum age = 67 years). The average working experience of the faculty members was 7 years.

4.2. Research Instruments

Research instruments for the present study were adopted from the literature. These adopted scales have been used in the past [7,45,48] and were found to be valid and reliable. All items of the constructs were measured on a Likert scale of 1 to 5. The scale ranged from “strongly disagree” = 1 to “strongly agree” = 5.
POF was measured with six items. These items were adopted from Cable and DeRue [26] and Vogel and Feldman [7]. An example item of the scale is: “My personal values match my organisation’s values and culture.” Likewise, Cable and DeRue’s [26] six items scale was used for the measurement of PJF. These items represent the congruence of individual ability and needs with the demand and resources of the job. The sample item of the scale is: “My abilities and training are a good fit with the requirements of my job.” Finally, scales were adopted from O’Reilly et al. [49] and Cennamo and Gardner [50] for the measurement of turnover intention. An example item of the scale includes: “Thoughts about quitting this job cross my mind.”
Since this study is cross-sectional, therefore, the possibility of common method variance (CMV) was assessed using Podsakoff et al.’s [51] procedural remedies and Harman’s single factor test. Significant CMV would occur if one general factor accounted for more than 50% of the variance in the items used. In this study, the variance explained by the single factor was 43.37%, which is less the minimum threshold. Thus, there is no CMV issue in this study.

4.3. Data Analysis Tools

We used the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 24) and PLS-SEM to examine the research model. PLS-SEM was suitable for the present study since the study aimed to explain the amount of variance in the endogenous constructs (i.e., turnover intention) [52,53]. The means (M), the deviation of the data from the means (SD), and the correlations of the study variables were calculated through SPSS 24. SmartPls3.2.8 was used to assess the reliability and validity of the measurement model. The goodness of fit of the structural model and the significance of the path coefficient was evaluated using SmartPls3.2.8 software.

4.4. Results

Means, SD and bivariate correlations between the variables of interest are provided in Table 1. The results (Table 1) reveal that POF and PJF are strongly and negatively correlated with intention to quit (r = −0.27 **, p < 0.001; r = −0.40 **, p < 0.001), respectively. The correlations of POF with PJF are significant and positive (r = 0.56 **, p < 0.001).

Constructs Reliability and Validity

To assess whether the latent constructs and items used in the survey were reliable and valid, we estimated the values of factors loading (FLs), Cronbach Alpha (CAs; α), and Composite Reliability (CR). α and CR are the measures of the constructs’ internal consistency reliability, while the reliability of the items are measured by FLs. We also calculated the constructs’ validity using Average Variance Extract (AVE). Furthermore, Fornell-Larcker Criterion and Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) were used for the assessment of discriminate validity.
Hair et al. [54] posit that an item or indicator is said to be reliable if the values of FLs are greater than 0.70 (FLs ≥ 0.70). In the present study, all items (Figure 2) of the constructs were reliable (FL ≥ 0.70), with the exception of the item FOF6. The factor loadings of the item (FOF6) was 0.510; therefore, item FOF6 was deleted. The FLs of the remaining POF with five items range from 0.723 to 0.800. Similarly, the FLs for PJF and intention to leave range from 0.700 to 0.846.
Furthermore, the results (see Table 2) show that CAs and CRs are higher than 0.70 and in the acceptable range [54]. Additionally, all the constructs of the study ensured convergent validity since the values of AVE were greater than the 0.50 threshold [55]. The results also revealed that the Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) were less than 5; thus, collinearity was not an issue among the constructs (Table 2).
Lastly, the constructs of the study were subject to discriminate validity. Discriminate validity represents the distinctiveness of the construct from the rest of the constructs in the model. The results of Fornell-Larcker Criterion (Table 3) and HTMT (Table 4) show that all the constructs are discriminately valid.

4.5. Structural Model

Assessment of the structural model provides an estimation of the hypothesised relationship among variables of interest. In PLS-SEM, the measures of the structural model are R-square (R2), path coefficients (β), and Q-square (Q2), or the predictive relevancy of the model, respectively. R2 represents the explanatory power of the overall model. In the structural model, R2 values of 0.75 are considered substantial, while R2 equal to 0.50 is regarded as moderate. R2 equal to 0.25 represents the weak explanatory power of the model [54]. In the present study, the R2 value for an endogenous latent construct such as turnover intention was weak (R2 = 0.180). However, the R2 value for PJF was moderate (R2 = 0.298).
Q-square (Q2), which reflects the relative predictive relevance of each predictor construct on endogenous constructs, was calculated using the blindfolding procedure. A model is said to possess predictive relevance if Q2 values are larger than zero [54]. In this study, Q2 values for all exogenous constructs were larger than zero, thus confirming the predictive significance of each exogenous construct.
Finally, path coefficient (β), which shows the significance and strength of the relationship among constructs, was obtained using bootstrapping (5000 subsamples, two-tail test). The results of the structural model’s path-coefficient are provided in Table 5. The findings (see Table 5) revealed that the path-coefficient between POF and turnover intention was insignificant (β = −0.076, t = 1.023, p = 0.153), thus rejecting H1. However, the path-coefficient between PJF and turnover intention was negatively significant (β = −0.379, t = 5.747, p < 0.05), providing support for H2. H3, which shows the relationship between POF and PJF, was significant and positive (β = 0.546, t = 10.437, p < 0.05).
For the assessment of the mediating effect of PJF, Preacher and Hayes [56] procedure was used. The result revealed that POF had an indirect effect on turnover intention via PJF (β = −0.207, t = 4.781, p < 0.05), thus providing support for the full mediation of PJF between POF and turnover intention.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

In today’s uncertain and competitive business world, one of the critical success factors in retaining employees is their compatibility with the attributes of the organisation [9,57]. This study investigated the direct and indirect effects of POF (via PJF) on academics’ turnover intentions. Drawing on spillover theory, the study also hypothesised the positive influence of POF on PJF, and, in return, PJF’s negative influence on faculty members’ intention to leave their jobs in HEIs of Pakistan. Additionally, the objective of the study was to validate the POF and PJF scale in Pakistan’s academic work context.
Contrary to our expectations, the results of the study revealed that POF is not a significant predictor of faculty members’ turnover intentions in Pakistan. This finding is in contrast to previous literature and theories [7,8,11,58], which always provide support for the negative and significant impact of POF on employees’ turnover intentions. However, the finding, to some extent, corroborates the work of Astakhova [23], who reported no significant relationship between fit (i.e., person-supervisor fit) and OC in the USA. One of the reasons for this insignificance may be the different context of the study, i.e., HEIs, since the public sector’s HEIs are non-profit seeking, and their values and goals are different from other profit-oriented organisation. Therefore, our findings suggest that employees working in HEIs have a different perception of organisations than employees working in non-academic organisations. This change in employees’ perception may be one of the reasons for the insignificant relationship between POF and turnover intention. Additionally, this study used both values and goals congruence for the measurement of POF, while prior studies have either used goals or values congruence only. This change in the measurement method may have resulted in the insignificant path coefficient between POF and turnover intention. We also expect that a high correlation between POF and PJF (0.56 **, p < 0.001) may have contributed to this insignificance. Furthermore, the majority of earlier studies were conducted in Western countries; therefore, we expect that Pakistan’s cultural values and norms may have caused this insignificance.
Another imperative finding of this study was the significant and positive influence of POF on PJF fit. This finding suggests that faculty members who perceive a high congruence with their organisation are more likely to feel compatible with job characteristics. This result is aligned with Vekeman et al. [57] contention that teachers who fit the characteristics of the schools (i.e., organisation) were more satisfied and less willing to quit the profession. This finding is also in line with spillover theory, which maintains that perception of fit in one sphere (e.g., POF) can spillover positively into another sphere (i.e., PJF) [41]. Furthermore, the study revealed that academic members who fit the demand and resources of the job (PJF) had reduced turnover intention. This finding is in line with Badger Darrow and Behrend [10] and Vogel and Feldman’s [7] studies, which report that PJF is significantly related to employees’ intention to quit their job.
One interesting conclusion from this study is the mediating role of PJF in POF-turnover intention relationships. This finding suggests that the influence of POF on turnover intention is not straightforward; rather, it is mediated by PJF. This result implies that when faculty members feel compatible with the values and goals of the organisation, they will exhibit a better fit with the job, which, in return, negatively influences their intention to quit the job. Previous research also substantiates the mediating role of PJF between employees’ turnover intention and their respective antecedents, including perceived organisation support [17] and person-vocation fit [7]. Thus, drawing on the findings, we suggest that there is an underlying mechanism or mediation between POF and its outcomes.
Moreover, the study objective was to validate the POF and PJF scales in Pakistan’s context. Both scales for POF and PJF were adopted from the literature. Prior literature has shown that POF and PJF scales are valid and reliable [7,18]. However, contrary to the literature, our results showed that the scales used for POF are not always reliable. The findings revealed that the factor loading of one item (POF6) of POF was very low (i.e., 0.510), suggesting that item POF6 is not important. Hairet al. [54] recommend that items with a factor loading less than 0.70 are not reliable and should therefore be deleted. Hence, item FOF6 was deleted from the final analysis.
Item POF6 has yielded a reliable score in various work settings, however, in the context of HEIs and Pakistan, its loading was less than the 0.70 threshold [53]. Hence, based on these results, we suggest that the validity and reliability of the measurement scales vary across countries and organisations. Thus, we conclude that country and organisational context matter in the reliability and validity of the constructs. Therefore, it is appropriate to check the validity and reliability of a construct, even if the items (indicators) of the construct are adopted or adapted from reliable and valid sources.

6. Implications

This study has several theoretical and practical implications. First, it extends our understanding of how academic members’ compatibility with their organisation affects their fit to the job and turnover intention. Second, it provides empirical support for the mediating role of PJF between POF and turnover intention. To our understanding, this is one of the pioneering studies that has examined the indirect influence of POF on academics’ turnover intention. Third, this study provides empirical support to the ASA framework [40] that people tend to stay with their organisation when their characteristics match the organisations’ characteristics.
Additionally, this study has some significant practical implications. First, the study specifies that POF and PJF are essential predictors of academics’ intention to leave their job. Thus, a college principal who wants to retain faculty members should emphasise the enhancement of the fit of the organisation’s values and goals with those of the faculty members. In addition, compatibility between job characteristics and faculty attributes are also important elements of faculty retention. Thus, management should not only enhance the fit between the academic and the organisation by arranging orientation and training programs but also ensure that such practices enhance the fit between faculty and job. If management practices fail to enhance the fit between faculty and job, the potential benefits of organisational practices (e.g., orientation and training) will not yield the desired results of lowering turnover intention because the effect of POF on turnover intention is transferred through PJF. Thus, a way through which colleges can retain their faculty members is to provide training and job opportunities, development opportunities and enhance the monetary and non-monetary allowances of faculty members. The provision of such practices will result in a better POF, which will positively influence PJF, and, in turn, PJF will negatively influence their intention to quit.

7. Research Limitation and Future Research

Although the study provides useful insight on some important issues, its results should be considered in light of its restrictions. First, the study is cross-sectional in nature; therefore, the findings may not depict the real picture of causality. Second, the data were only collected from full-time academics in public sector HEIs. If data had been collected from different sources, the findings might have been different. Third, this study only investigated POF and PJF as antecedents of intention to leave; future researchers are encouraged to assess the impact of other fit concepts such as person-vocation fit (PVF), person-supervisors fit (PSF) and person-group fit (PGF) on intention to leave. In addition, the present study tested the mediating role of PJF; we expect that PVF, PSF and PGF could be possible mediators or moderators of the POF-intention to leave relationship.
We encourage future researchers to validate the conceptual model (see Figure 1) with a longitudinal study in different work settings, such as manufacturing, textile, information technology, health, and public sector organisations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, R.A.S. and N.N.A.M.; Supervision, R.A.S. and N.N.A.M.; Manuscript write-up, A.S.K.; Data collection and Analysis, A.S.K.; Review and Editing, H.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Schloss, E.P.; Flanagan, D.M.; Culler, C.L.; Wright, A.L. Some hidden costs of faculty turnover in clinical departments in one academic medical center. Acad. Med. 2009, 84, 32–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Webber, K.L. Does the environment matter? Faculty satisfaction at 4-year colleges and universities in the USA. High. Educ. 2018, 78, 323–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Asrar-Ul-Haq, M.; Ali, H.Y.; Anwar, S.; Iqbal, A.; Iqbal, M.B.; Suleman, N.; Sadiq, I.; Haris-ul-Mahasbi, M. Impact of organisational politics on employee work outcomes in higher education institutions of Pakistan: Moderating role of social capital. South Asian J. Bus. Stud. 2019, 8, 185–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Usman, S.; Jangraiz, K. An Analysis of the Factors Affecting Turnover Intensions: Evidence from Private Sector Universities of Peshawar. J. Soc. Adm. Sci. 2015, 2, 144–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Johnsrud, L.K.; Rosser, V.J. Faculty Members’ Morale and Their Intention to Leave: A Multilevel Explanation. J. High. Educ. 2002, 73, 518–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kristof, A.L. Person-Organization Fit: An Integrative Review of Its Conceptualisations, Measurement, and Implications. Pers. Psychol. 1996, 49, 1–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Vogel, R.M.; Feldman, D.C. Integrating the levels of person-environment fit: The roles of vocational fit and group fit. J. Vocat. Behav. 2009, 75, 68–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Andela, M.; van der Doef, M. A Comprehensive Assessment of the Person–Environment Fit Dimensions and Their Relationships with Work-Related Outcomes. J. Career Dev. 2019, 46, 567–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Jin, M.H.; McDonald, B.; Park, J. Person–Organization Fit and Turnover Intention: Exploring the Mediating Role of Employee Followership and Job Satisfaction through Conservation of Resources Theory. Rev. Public Pers. Adm. 2018, 38, 167–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Darrow, J.B.; Behrend, T.S. Person-environment fit is a formative construct. J. Vocat. Behav. 2017, 103, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kristof-brown, A.M.Y.L.; Zimmerman, R.D.; Johnson, E.C. Consequences of Individuals’ Fit at Work: A Meta-Analysis of Person—Job, Person—Organization, Person—Group, and Person—Supervisor Fit. Pers. Psychol. 2005, 58, 281–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chhabra, B. Work role stressors and employee outcomes: Investigating the moderating role of subjective person-organisation and person-job fit perceptions in Indian organisations. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 2016, 24, 390–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Suwanti, S.; Udin, U.; Widodo, W. Person-Organization Fit, Person-Job Fit, and Innovative Work Behavior: The Role of Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Int. J. Econ. Bus. Adm. 2018, 6, 146–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Giauque, D.; Resenterra, F.; Siggen, M. Antecedents of Job Satisfaction, Organisational Commitment and Stress in a Public Hospital: A P-E Fit Perspective. Public Organ. Rev. 2014, 14, 201–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Chen, P.; Sparrow, P.; Cooper, C. The relationship between person-organisation fit and job satisfaction. J. Manag. Psychol. 2016, 31, 946–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wheeler, A.R.; Gallagher, V.C.; Brouer, R.L.; Sablynski, C.J. When person-organization (mis) fit and (dis) satisfaction lead to turnover: The moderating role of perceived job mobility. J. Manag. Psychol. 2007, 22, 203–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tseng, L.M.; Yu, T.W. How can managers promote salespeople’s person-job fit?: The effects of cooperative learning and perceived organisational support. Learn. Organ. 2016, 23, 61–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yu, K.Y.T. Inter-Relationships among Different Types of Person-Environment Fit and Job Satisfaction. Appl. Psychol. 2016, 65, 38–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Westerman, J.W.; Cyr, L.A. An integrative analysis of person-organisation fit theories. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 2004, 12, 252–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Peng, J.C.; Lee, Y.L.; Tseng, M.M. Person-organisation fit and turnover intention: Exploring the mediating effect of work engagement and the moderating effect of demand-ability fit. J. Nurs. Res. 2014, 22, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kakar, A.S.; Saufi, R.A.; Singh, H. Understanding linkage between human resource management practices and intention to leave: A moderated-mediation conceptual model. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Information Management & Management Science, Chengdu, China, 24–26 August 2018; pp. 114–118. [Google Scholar]
  22. Huang, Y.; Ma, Z.; Meng, Y. High-performance work systems and employee engagement: Empirical evidence from China. Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 2018, 56, 341–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Astakhova, M.N. Explaining the effects of perceived person-supervisor fit and person-organisation fit on organisational commitment in the U.S. and Japan. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 956–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Piasentin, K.A.; Chapman, D.S. Subjective person-organisation fit: Bridging the gap between conceptualisation and measurement. J. Vocat. Behav. 2006, 69, 202–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Chatman, J.A. Matching People and Organisations—Selection and Socialisation in Public Accounting Firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 1991, 36, 459–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Cable, D.M.; DeRue, D.S. The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. J. Appl. Psychol. 2002, 87, 875–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Lauver, K.J.; Kristof-Brown, A. Distinguishing between Employees’ Perceptions of Person–Job and Person–Organization Fit. J. Vocat. Behav. 2001, 59, 454–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Boon, C.; Den Hartog, D.N.; Boselie, P.; Paauwe, J. The relationship between perceptions of HR practices and employee outcomes: Examining the role of person–organisation and person–job fit. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2011, 22, 138–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kakar, A.S.; Saufi, R.A.; Mansor, N.N.A. Person-organisation fit and job opportunities matter in HRM practices-turnover intention relationship: A moderated mediation model. Amazon. Investig. 2019, 8, 155–165. [Google Scholar]
  30. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Griffeth, R.W.; Hom, P.W.; Gaertner, S. A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents and Correlates of Employee Turnover: Update, Moderator Tests, and Research Implications for the Next Millennium. J. Manag. 2000, 26, 463–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rubenstein, A.L.; Eberly, M.B.; Lee, T.W.; Mitchell, T.R. Surveying the forest: A meta-analysis, moderator investigation, and future-oriented discussion of the antecedents of voluntary employee turnover. Pers. Psychol. 2018, 71, 23–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bluedorn, A.C. A Unified Model of Turnover from Organisations. Hum. Relat. 1982, 35, 135–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Mobley, W.H. Intermediate Linkage in the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover. J. Appl. Psychol. 1977, 62, 237–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mowday, R.T. Strategies for adapting to high rates of employee turnover. Hum. Resour. Manag. 1984, 23, 365–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Dalton, D.R.; Johnson, J.L.; Daily, C.M. On the use of “intent to...” variables in organisational research: An empirical and cautionary assessment. Hum. Relat. 1999, 52, 1337–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  38. Price, J.L.; Mueller, C.W. Causal Model of Turnover for Nurses. Acad. Manag. 1981, 24, 543–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sager, J.K.; Griffeth, R.W.; Hom, P.W. A Comparison of Structural Models Representing Turnover Cognitions. J. Vocat. Behav. 1998, 53, 254–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Schneider, B. The People Make the Place 58. Pers. Psychol. 1987, 40, 437–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Jansen, K.J.; Kristof-Brown, A. Toward a multidimensional theory of person-environment fit. J. Manag. Issues 2006, 18, 193–212. [Google Scholar]
  42. Rurkkhum, S. The impact of person-organisation fit and leader-member exchange on withdrawal behaviors in Thailand. Asia Pac. J. Bus. Adm. 2018, 10, 114–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ribando, S.J.; Evans, L. Change happens: Assessing the initial impact of a university consolidation on faculty. Public Pers. Manag. 2015, 44, 99–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ellis, C.; Skidmore, S.T.; Combs, J.P. The hiring process matters: The role of person–job and person–organisation fit in teacher satisfaction. Educ. Adm. Q. 2017, 53, 448–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Boon, C.; Biron, M. Temporal issues in person–organisation fit, person–job fit and turnover: The role of leader–member exchange. Hum. Relat. 2016, 69, 2177–2200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Lang, A.-G.; Buchner, A. G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 2007, 39, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Bornstein, M.H.; Jager, J.; Putnick, D.L. Sampling in developmental science: Situations, shortcomings, solutions, and standards. Dev. Rev. 2013, 33, 357–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Lee, M.C.C.; Idris, M.A.; Tuckey, M. Supervisory coaching and performance feedback as mediators of the relationships between leadership styles, work engagement, and turnover intention. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2019, 22, 257–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. O’Reilly, C.A.; Chatman, J.; Caldwell, D.F. People and organisational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-fit. Acad. Manag. J. 1991, 34, 487–516. [Google Scholar]
  50. Cennamo, L.; Gardner, D. Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organisation values fit. J. Manag. Psychol. 2008, 23, 891–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Podsakoff, N.P. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012, 63, 539–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Richter, N.F.; Sinkovics, R.R.; Ringle, C.M.; Schlägel, C. A critical look at the use of SEM in international business research. Int. Mark. Rev. 2016, 33, 376–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  54. Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 879–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Vekeman, E.; Devos, G.; Valcke, M.; Rosseel, Y. Do teachers leave the profession or move to another school when they don’t fit? Educ. Rev. 2017, 69, 411–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kakar, A.S.; Saufi, R.A.; Mansor, N.N.A.; Singh, H. Work-life balance practices and turnover intention: The mediating role of person-organisation fit. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 2019, 6, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Sustainability 12 08189 g001 550
Figure 1. Conceptual model; the dashed line indicates the indirect effect.
Figure 1. Conceptual model; the dashed line indicates the indirect effect.
Sustainability 12 08189 g001
Sustainability 12 08189 g002 550
Figure 2. Measurement model.
Figure 2. Measurement model.
Sustainability 12 08189 g002
Table
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
ConstructsMeanStandard Deviation (SD)POFPJFITL
Person-organisation fit (POF)3.270.781
Person-job fit (PJF)3.000.830.56 **1
Intention to leave (ITL)3.351.01−0.27 **−0.40 **1
Note: n = 250 Individuals, ** p < 0.01; ITL (Intention to leave).
Table
Table 2. Constructs reliability and validity.
Table 2. Constructs reliability and validity.
ConstructsCronbach’s AlphaComposite Reliability(AVE)VIF
Turnover Intention0.8570.8960.635
Person-job fit0.8520.8900.5751.42
Person-organisation fit0.8460.8900.6191.45
Table
Table 3. Fornell-Larcker Criterion.
Table 3. Fornell-Larcker Criterion.
ConstructsITLPJFPOF
Intention to leave (ITL)0.797
Person-job fit−0.4210.758
Person-organisation fit−0.2830.5460.787
Table
Table 4. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).
Table 4. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).
ConstructsITLPJFPOF
Intention to leave-
Person-job fit0.465-
Person-organisation fit0.3300.636-
Table
Table 5. Structural model results.
Table 5. Structural model results.
Hypothesised Pathβ-Valuet-Valuep-ValueDecision
POF → Intention to leave−0.0761.0230.153Not Supported
POF → PJF0.54610.4370.000Supported
PJF → Intention to leave−0.3795.7480.000Supported
POF → PJF → Intention to leave−0.2074.7810.000Supported

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Saufi, R.A.; Mansor, N.N.A.; Kakar, A.S.; Singh, H. The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit between Person-Organisation Fit and Intention to Leave the Job: Empirical Evidence from Pakistan. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198189

AMA Style

Saufi RA, Mansor NNA, Kakar AS, Singh H. The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit between Person-Organisation Fit and Intention to Leave the Job: Empirical Evidence from Pakistan. Sustainability. 2020; 12(19):8189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198189

Chicago/Turabian Style

Saufi, Roselina Ahmad, Nur Naha Abu Mansor, Abdul Samad Kakar, and Harcharanjit Singh. 2020. "The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit between Person-Organisation Fit and Intention to Leave the Job: Empirical Evidence from Pakistan" Sustainability 12, no. 19: 8189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198189

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop