Skip to main content
placeholder image

Fit for the Future

Chapter


Abstract


  • This is a time of change for scholars of organizational fit (Judge, 2007). Although organizational fit has been shown to influence employees’ motivation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, tenure, and performance (Arthur et al., 2006; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Verquer et al., 2003), it remains questionably defined and often misunderstood. Yet, it is one of the most widely used psychological constructs in industrial and work psychology. The great irony is that the breadth of fit definitions that entices a wide range of scholars to the topic is what also generates the most criticism (e.g., Edwards, 2008; Harrison, 2007; Judge, 2007). It has been suggested that there are as many ways to conceptualize and measure fit as there are scholars who study it. Yet, we believe that criticisms of conceptual ambiguity are a side-effect of rich methodological variety and distinctly different approaches to the compelling concept of compatibility of individuals and their organizations.

Publication Date


  • 2013

Citation


  • Kristof-Brown, A. L. & Billsberry, J. (2013). Fit for the Future. In A. L. Kristof-Brown & J. Billsberry (Eds.), Organizational Fit Key: Issues and New Directions (pp. 1-18). Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.

International Standard Book Number (isbn) 13


  • 9780470683613

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-84888715436

Book Title


  • Organizational Fit Key: Issues and New Directions

Has Global Citation Frequency


Start Page


  • 1

End Page


  • 18

Place Of Publication


  • Chichester, United Kingdom

Abstract


  • This is a time of change for scholars of organizational fit (Judge, 2007). Although organizational fit has been shown to influence employees’ motivation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, tenure, and performance (Arthur et al., 2006; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Verquer et al., 2003), it remains questionably defined and often misunderstood. Yet, it is one of the most widely used psychological constructs in industrial and work psychology. The great irony is that the breadth of fit definitions that entices a wide range of scholars to the topic is what also generates the most criticism (e.g., Edwards, 2008; Harrison, 2007; Judge, 2007). It has been suggested that there are as many ways to conceptualize and measure fit as there are scholars who study it. Yet, we believe that criticisms of conceptual ambiguity are a side-effect of rich methodological variety and distinctly different approaches to the compelling concept of compatibility of individuals and their organizations.

Publication Date


  • 2013

Citation


  • Kristof-Brown, A. L. & Billsberry, J. (2013). Fit for the Future. In A. L. Kristof-Brown & J. Billsberry (Eds.), Organizational Fit Key: Issues and New Directions (pp. 1-18). Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.

International Standard Book Number (isbn) 13


  • 9780470683613

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-84888715436

Book Title


  • Organizational Fit Key: Issues and New Directions

Has Global Citation Frequency


Start Page


  • 1

End Page


  • 18

Place Of Publication


  • Chichester, United Kingdom