1. Fit for the Future

long-term, goal-oriented ones). This is proposed to influence the strength with which fit at the entity, person, and task levels influences outcomes for those individuals. Finally, individuals’ past versus future orientation is proposed as an influence on the effects of both discrepancy magnitudes and velocities on fit–outcome relationships. Thus, by building on self-regulation theory, these authors shed insight into the motivational processes underlying fit, and provide several new directions for research to examine how to strengthen fit−outcome relationships. Shifting from the perspective of what motivates people to seek fit, Resick, Giberson, Dickson, Wynne, and Bajdo focus instead on what fit motivates people to do. In particular, they explore the oft-reported finding that people who form a strong sense of fit with their organizations also tend to be good organizational citizens. They present a theoretical model examining the social-cognitive psychological processes that are triggered by a person’s conscious perception of fit with an organization, and which then motivates that person to engage in discretionary, prosocial work performance. They base their model on Mischel and Shoda’s (1995) cognitive-affective personality system (CAPS) theory, which proposes that people have cognitive and affective reactions to features of their environments that are relevant to an existing schema. Applying this logic to fit, Resick and colleagues argue that individuals create personally held schemas for what makes a “good organizational fit. ” These schemas are based on personal characteristics, such as values and goals, and may be intensified or clarified by past experience. They propose that individuals attend to features of their work environment to assess whether they match their fit-related schema. If they perceive fit, then four cognitive-affective processes are stimulated. These include the incorporation of organizational membership into one’s self-identity, the experience of positive emotion as a result of perceived fit, the formation of motivational strivings that are aligned with organizational success, and the development of specific expectancies that personal efforts can help the organization succeed and thereby preserve employment with that company. These four psychological mechanisms combine to form a processing disposition that inclines people toward engaging in citizenship performance. Building on the logic of self-regulation theory, they then close the loop by proposing that feedback received as a result of citizenship performance will lead to alterations in the intensity of the cognitive and affective reactions, the strength of fit perceptions, and the content of fit-related schema over time. In this way, this chapter views perceived fit as a motivator of other actions at work. Billsberry, Talbot, and Ambrosini approach organizational fit from a perceived fit perspective, with strong interpretivist underpinnings. They are interested in discovering the nature of people’s perceptions of fit and misfit, how they are formed, and how they influence behavior. However, this chapter is very different from other chapters in this book because, rather than extend fit theory or look at how fit may influence other factors, the authors recognize that perceived fit research is in its infancy and focus their attention on how researchers might develop theories about perceived fit. Their conceptual investigation begins with the nomothetic–idiographic JWST231-c01 JWST231-Billsberry Printer: Yet to Come October 17, 2012 10:6 Trim: 246mm × 171mm 12 A. L. Kristof-Brown and J. Billsberry divide that PE fit researchers (e.g., Chatman, 1989) examined in the early days of organizational fit research. The primary insight in this chapter is the realization that the research stages of data generation and data analysis might be considered differently from nomothetic and idiographic perspectives. From a perceived fit perspective this is important because it suggests that researchers might be able to take idiographic approaches to data generation and thereby gain an in-depth understanding of the individual, but use nomothetic data analysis approaches to look for similarities and differences between people and thereby generate testable propositions. In the second part of this chapter, the authors look at cognitive mapping as a means to conduct idiographic data gathering that explores individuals’ deep-seated perceptions of fit. They also show some of the different ways in which such data might be analyzed. By focusing on this research method, they illustrate how data gathering and data analysis are two separate phases that can be conducted separately. Through their analysis of data generation and analysis, the authors illustrate how different empirical research in perceived fit will be from PE fit when an interpretivist approach is taken. Part 2: New directions for the fit paradigms Building on the idea that individuals hold fit-related schemas or mental models, Van Vianen, Stoelhorst, and De Goede emphasize the construal process by asking what people “have in mind” when they assess fit. They begin by arguing that people experience a fundamental need to belong, from both evolutionary and psychological perspectives. These perspectives may differ on why people have this need, but they are consistent in asserting people’s natural tendency to strive for belonging, often with similar others. Asking the fundamental question of what people consider when they assess fit, these authors argue that despite the multidimensional nature of fit, people are likely to use only a limited set of cues on which to determine fit. In terms of sources, they emphasize that people are likely to focus on only a few cues from important (and concrete) others regarding what the organization is like. And in terms of focal referent, they suggest that psychological theories emphasize the individual as the primary reference for fit, whereas the evolutionary theories suggest that the environment will be the focal reference. Finally, in keeping with a dynamic view of fit, these authors suggest that this construal process is likely to change over time depending on what stage (attraction, selection, or post-organizational entry) of the work relationship the person is in. Using Construal Level Theory (CLT; Liberman et al., 2002; Trope and Liberman, 2003), these authors suggest that people will construct mental models of fit differently as their “distance” from the organization changes. At the beginning of the process – for example, when novice job seekers are just beginning to look at companies to join – their fit schema should be based on a few, abstract dimensions. Furthermore, those dimensions will stem from self-rooted perceptions about what is desirable JWST231-c01 JWST231-Billsberry Printer: Yet to Come October 17, 2012 10:6 Trim: 246mm × 171mm Fit for the Future 13 in an organization. As such, they portray initial fit perceptions as a relatively egocentric and content-deficient assessment. As the selection stage begins, individuals begin to interact more closely with organizational insiders, particularly recruiters. This, combined with pre-interview perceptions of fit, and perceived fairness of the selection system, contributes to the establishment of organizational fit perceptions during selection. Then during the first 4 to 6 months of the employment relationship, individuals focus on particular groups of insiders as the focal reference for organizational fit assessments. These salient individuals become the ultimate source of organizational fit perceptions post-hire, implying that only “some people make the place. ” Newcomers’ fit perceptions therefore depend primarily on similarity with the salient and shared features of prototypical members. Lower levels of similarity with such members make it more difficult for newcomers to behave like insiders, and these discrepant behaviors then feed into perceptions of organizational misfit and feelings of social exclusion. Wheeler, Halbesleben, and Shanine shed further light on the underlying mechanisms through which individuals react to a lack of fit. Using conservation of resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1988, 1998), these authors elaborate on four motivational mechanisms that underlie the pursuit and maintenance of fit. Viewing individuals as resource seekers and their environments as resource providers, these authors describe four paths by which individuals will seek to accumulate, protect, and invest resources, all resulting in sustaining a desired level of fit. First, individuals experience stress when they are faced with resource losses, and satisfaction when they experience resource gain. Second, they are motivated to invest their current resources in order to gain others, resulting in a cyclical process of resource expenditure and replenishment. People who have more resources to begin with are generally better able to gain more by relying on social support and also by hoarding excess resources for investment. These processes can result in a resource gain spiral, by which excesses result in additional gains. Alternatively, those who have fewer resources initially to invest will end up in a downward spiral of resource loss or conservation. The authors argue that COR as a theory can be used to explain multidimensional fit and the diverse conceptualizations of fit that exist. This includes supplementary fit, in which an individual matches with the environment, as well as complementary fit, in which one party adds something new to the other. The key is whether or not individuals have, or can work to attain, sufficient resources to meet the demands of the environment and vice versa. One of the benefits of this resource-based perspective is that it blurs the lines between the traditional domains of supplementary and complementary fit. Needs and values and traits and skills all become resources that are interchangeable. The a