PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 1 Running head: PE FIT AND NEED SATISFACTION Different Fits Satisfy Different Needs: Linking Person-Environment Fit to Employee Attitudes and Performance Using Self-Determination Theory

Integrating and expanding upon the person-environment fit (PE fit) and the selfdetermination theory literatures, we hypothesized and tested two competing models in which the satisfaction of the psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence mediated or partially mediated the relations between different types of PE fit (i.e., person-organization, person-group, and person-job fit) with employee attitudes (i.e., affective organizational commitment, job satisfaction) and overall job performance. Data from 164 full-time working employees and their supervisors were collected across three time periods. Results indicated that different types of PE fit predicted different types of psychological need satisfaction, and the satisfying of different psychological needs predicted different employee outcomes. Further, person-organization and person-job fit had both direct and indirect effects on employee attitudes. These results begin to explicate the processes through which different types of PE fit differentially relate to employee attitudes and behaviors. PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 3 Different Fits Satisfy Different Needs: Linking Person-Environment Fit to Employee Attitudes and Performance Using Self-Determination Theory The match between employees and their work environments is one of the most widely researched topics in organizational behavior (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005; Schneider, 2001). This match between characteristics of individuals and their work environments is commonly referred to as person-environment fit (PE fit), or simply fit. Understanding PE fit is important because of its influence on outcomes at each phase of employees’ organizational life cycles. For example, perceptions of fit predict decisions to join organizations (Cable & Judge, 1996; Turban & Keon, 1993), behaviors and attitudes while employed (Tziner, 1987; Westerman & Cyr, 2004), and intentions to quit and exit the organization (O’Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991). Why does fit relate to such a large and diverse set of employee attitudes and behaviors? Much of the theoretical rationale suggests that fit influences outcomes through the fulfillment of needs. As Arthur, Bell, Villado, and Doverspike (2006) note: “Theoretically, the relation between fit and attitudes is predicated on the reasoning that when there is fit, the environment affords individuals the opportunity to fulfill their needs...Need fulfillment results in favorable attitudes, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment” (p. 787). This rationale suggests that need fulfillment mediates the relations between fit and outcome variables, yet this theoretical assumption remains largely untested (for an exception, see Cable & Edwards, 2004). The lack of research investigating this fundamental theoretical proposition is especially surprising given the large amount of PE fit research. Although much is known about the correlates PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 4 of PE fit, much less is known about the processes through which PE fit influences employee work-related outcomes. One theoretical framework that emphasizes the importance of psychological need satisfaction for well-being and optimal performance and that may explain why PE fit relates to employee attitudes and behaviors is self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985a; 1991). Self-determination theory (SDT) posits that individuals have three universal psychological needs pertaining to autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2001). According to SDT, the satisfaction of these psychological needs is essential for psychological growth, optimal functioning, and well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Given the importance of satisfying these psychological needs, much of the SDT research has focused on elements of the social context that facilitate or thwart their satisfaction (Ryan & Deci, 2000); PE fit may be one such element. Although SDT has been widely supported in a variety of disciplines and has been theorized to impact employees’ attitudes and behaviors, it has received little attention in organizational contexts (Gagné & Deci, 2005; Sheldon, Turban, Brown, Barrick, & Judge, 2003). The current study integrates and builds upon the PE fit and SDT literatures to hypothesize and test two competing models in which psychological need fulfillment mediates or partially mediates the relations between different types of PE fit (e.g., personorganization fit, person-group fit) and employee attitudes and performance. In doing so, the current study makes the following contributions. First, as noted above, we provide a test of a fundamental tenet of PE fit theory that psychological need fulfillment explains how fit relates to employee outcomes. Second, the current study examines whether different types of fit satisfy different psychological needs, and whether the satisfaction of PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 5 these psychological needs relate to attitudes and performance. In doing so, the current study begins to explore the processes through which PE fit influences employee outcomes. Third, we assess multiple types of fit which enables us to examine the unique effects of different types of fit on attitudes and performance. As Kristof-Brown et al. (2005) noted in their meta-analysis of PE fit: “...research comparing the effects of simultaneous assessments of multiple kinds of fit is needed” (p. 323). Fourth, we conceptualize and examine “underexplored areas of fit” (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005, p. 321) by including person-group fit (PG fit) in our hypothesized model. Fifth, we contribute to the SDT literature by investigating various types of fit as antecedents to the satisfaction of psychological needs. Applying the SDT framework to a work context also provides an assessment of the efficacy of SDT constructs to predict work-related criteria. We begin by providing a brief overview of the various conceptualizations and types of PE fit. We also review PE fit research as it pertains to need fulfillment and discuss the basic theoretical framework and concepts of SDT. We then integrate these literatures to present and test two competing theoretical models in which psychological need satisfaction mediates or partially mediates the relations between PE fit and employee attitudes and performance. PE Fit Conceptualizations of PE fit typically distinguish between supplementary and complementary fit (see Kristof, 1996). Supplementary fit occurs when both the employee and the work environment possess the same characteristics (Kristof, 1996). For example, supplementary fit exists if the employee and the organization both value innovativeness. Supplementary fit has been operationalized in a variety of different ways including being PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 6 defined as the similarity between employees and organizations in their values, attitudes, personality traits, or goals (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Of these, value congruence is the most common operationalization and represents the similarity between individual values and those of the organization or its members (Chatman, 1989). In contrast, complementary fit occurs when the employee and the work environment possess different characteristics, but in doing so, add something that is missing to the other. That is, with complementary fit, the employee or the organization provides something that the other entity needs or wants. Integrating these different conceptualizations, Kristof (1996) offered the following definition of fit: “...fit is defined as the compatibility between people and organizations that occurs when: (a) at least one entity provides what the other needs, or (b) they share similar fundamental characteristics, or (c) both” (pp. 4-5). In addition to the conceptual distinctions between supplementary and complementary fit, it is widely accepted that fit is a multidimensional concept (KristofBrown et al., 2005; Law, Wong, & Mobley, 1998). The most commonly investigated types of fit include person-vocation fit (PV fit), person-organization fit (PO fit), and person-job fit (PJ fit), with less research examining person-group fit (PG fit) or personsupervisor fit (PS fit). Research suggests that these different types of fit are only moderately related to each other and that each relates differently to criteria (KristofBrown et al., 2005). For example, research indicates that job satisfaction correlates more strongly with PJ fit than with PO fit, whereas, organizational commitment correlates more strongly with PO fit than PJ fit (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Although there is a substantial amount of research investigating the bivariate relations between PE fit and employee criteria, little research has examined the processes PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 7 through which PE fit relates to employee outcomes. As noted above, theoretically the fulfillment of psychological needs mediates the relations between PE fit and employee outcomes (Arthur et al., 2006). Cable and Edwards (2004) conducted the only study we could locate that investigated whether psychological need fulfillment mediates the relation of value congruence (supplementary PE fit) with employee work-related criteria. Their results indicated that need fulfillment partially mediated the relations between value congruence and employee attitudes. More specifically, they observed that the direct (i.e., unmediated) effect of fit on criteria was significant in every instance and in over half of the analyses was larger than the indirect effect (i.e., mediated through need fulfillment). In their directions for future research, Cable and Edwards (2004) suggested assessing the relations between value congruence, psychological need satisfactions, and employee outcomes using different samples, types of fit, and scales of values and psychological needs; the current study incorporates each of these suggestions. In summary, the fit literature indicates that there are several conceptualizations (i.e., supplementary and complementary fit) and types of fit (e.g., PG fit, PS fit) that differentially relate to employee attitudes and behaviors. Limited research suggests that psychological need fulfillment partially mediates the relations between PE fit and employee outcomes. Additional research that investigates the relations between PE fit, psychological need satisfactions, and employee outcomes is needed to enhance our understanding of the processes through which, or reasons why, various types of fit differentially relate to employee outcomes. We contend that different types of fit may satisfy different psychological needs, and that the satisfaction of different psychological needs relates to distinct employee outcomes. Because SDT articulates the importance of PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 8 psychological need satisfaction in producing well-being, favorable attitudes, and positive behaviors, we believe SDT may be especially well-equipped for describing the processes through which various types of fit differentially relate to employee outcomes. Self-determination Theory Self-determination theory is a motivational theory based on the premise that human beings inherently desire to develop and grow toward their fullest potential (for a detailed discussion, see Deci & Ryan 1991, 2001). According to SDT, the degree to which individuals actually develop to their fullest potential and function optimally depends on their ability to satisfy their innate psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 2001). SDT argues that there are three innate psychological needs that are essential for optimal functioning: need for autonomy (i.e., need to exercise control over one’s actions), need for relatedness (i.e., need to feel connected with others), and need for competence (i.e., need to have an effect on one’s outcomes and surroundings). The satisfaction of these psychological needs is associated with high levels of intrinsic motivation, which relate to favorable outcomes (Deci & Ryan, 2001). Research supports the relations of the psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness with positive outcomes (e.g., well-being) over time and across cultures (e.g., Deci, Ryan, Gagné, Usonov, & Kornazheva, 2001; Sheldon et al., 2004; Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, & Kasser, 2001). Because of the integral role that psychological need satisfaction plays in influencing individual outcomes, SDT research typically has examined individual tendencies (e.g., personality traits) and elements of the social environments (e.g., reward structures) that facilitate or thwart the satisfaction of the psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence (Gagné & Deci, 2005; Ryan & Deci, 2000; PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 9 Sheldon et al., 2003). Extending SDT to an organizational context, it can be argued that factors that facilitate or thwart the satisfaction of one’s innate psychological needs impact employee intrinsic motivation, performance, job satisfaction, and other work-related criteria (Gagné & Deci, 2005; Sheldon et al., 2003). A basic premise of the current paper is that PE fit (misfit) is one factor that facilitates (thwarts) the satisfaction of these psychological needs, and therefore, leads to favorable (unfavorable) outcomes. Present Investigation We build upon the PE fit and SDT literatures by developing and testing two competing theoretical models in which satisfying employees’ psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence mediates (Model A) or partially mediates (Model B) the relations between various types of PE fit and employee attitudes and behavior. Model A is based on the theoretical rationale that PE fit influences employee outcomes through the satisfaction of psychological needs (Arthur et al., 2006). Model B is based on Cable and Edwards’s (2004) results that indicated value congruence (i.e., PE fit) directly and indirectly relates to employee work-related outcomes. Contrasting these competing theoretical models will allow us to identify the model that provides the most useful explanations and best fit to the data (James, Mulaik, & Brett, 1982). In developing these two models, we theorize that different types of fit align with different psychological needs, and that the satisfaction of each psychological need uniquely relates to employee outcomes. Similar to Kristof-Brown, Jansen, and Colbert (2002), we examined employees’ fit with multiple systems of their work environments by assessing PO fit, PJ fit, and PG fit. We focused on subjective measures of fit because it is PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 10 the perception of fit or misfit that influences employee attitudes and behaviors (Cable & DeRue, 2002; Endler & Magnusson, 1976; French, Caplan, & Harrison, 1982). Hypothesized Model A: Full Mediation Linking PE fit to Psychological Need Satisfaction The hypothesized models are presented in Figure 1 (Model A is represented by the solid lines, Model B is represented by the solid and dashed lines). Consistent with the majority of PO fit research, we conceptualize PO fit as the degree of value congruence between employees and the value systems of their organizations (Chatman, 1989; Kristof, 1996). Organizations’ value systems affect what organizations offer their employees (Schein, 1992), and similarly, employees’ values affect what they desire from their organizations (Cable & Edwards, 2004). To the degree that the value systems of employees and organizations are congruent, employees should be able to satisfy their needs. We hypothesize that employees whose value systems match their organizations’ will be better able to satisfy their needs for autonomy. Organizations may support employee autonomy need satisfaction in a variety of ways including considering employees’ perspectives, offering opportunities for input, and sharing information across organizational levels (Deci, Eghrari, Patrick, & Leone, 1994). Different employees likely prefer to satisfy their needs for autonomy in different ways. For example, some employees may prefer to participate in decision making while others may prefer to work independently. Further, if an employee prefers to participate in decision making and his organization allows him to do so, the employee should experience autonomy need satisfaction. However, if that same employee works in an organization that allows him to PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 11 work independently, but not to participate in decision making, he will likely not satisfy his need for autonomy. Therefore, we hypothesize that the degree of correspondence between employee and organizational values (i.e., PO fit) is expected to positively relate to employee autonomy need satisfaction. We also hypothesize that employees whose values match their organizations will be more likely to satisfy their needs for relatedness and competence. Specifically, employees might desire, and organizations provide, various avenues for satisfying employees’ relatedness needs. Organizations, for example, might sponsor team building retreats, support a common break room which facilitates interactions among employees, or encourage mentoring or socialization initiatives to increase the bond among employees. As noted above, employees likely differ in how they prefer to satisfy their psychological needs. For example, some employees may prefer mentoring while others may prefer team building retreats. The degree of correspondence between what employees desire and what organizations offer (PO fit) is expected to positively relate to relatedness need satisfaction. Similarly, PO fit should increase the likelihood that employees feel competent (Chatman, 1989; Swann, 1983). That is, organizations may offer a variety of programs or resources to develop the competencies of their employees (e.g., by offering training programs, implementing multisource feedback systems, providing opportunities for employee skill development). Consistent with the rationale presented above, employees likely prefer different mechanisms in which to satisfy their competence needs. We expect that competence need satisfaction will positively relate to the degree to which the organization and employee value the same mechanisms or opportunities for skill development. PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 12 Hypothesis 1: PO fit positively relates to autonomy need satisfaction. Hypothesis 2: PO fit positively relates to relatedness need satisfaction. Hypothesis 3: PO fit positively relates to competence need satisfaction. We also expect PG fit to positively relate to the satisfaction of employees’ relatedness needs. PG fit refers to the interpersonal compatibility between employees and their work groups (Werbel & Gilliland, 1999). The compatibility among coworkers likely enhances workplace interactions and facilitates communication (Adkins, Ravlin, & Meglino, 1996). Consistent with Byrne’s (1971) similarity-attraction paradigm, coworkers who share common values also find it easier to work together and to develop stronger bonds with one another than with dissimilar coworkers (Jackson et al., 1991). Because employees who perceive themselves to be compatible with their coworkers are more likely to interact, communicate, and develop bonds with them, we predict that PG fit positively relates to employees’ relatedness need satisfaction. Hypothesis 4: PG fit positively relates to relatedness need satisfaction. PJ fit refers to the match between an employee’s skills and abilities and those required to effectively perform one’s job (Kristof-Brown et al., 2002). We hypothesize that employees with the appropriate skills and abilities for a particular job should feel more competent engaging in job-related activities compared to individuals who do not perceive that their abilities match job demands (Cable & DeRue, 2002). Specifically, employees with high PJ fit should receive favorable feedback about their performance from the task and others (e.g., supervisors), and this favorable feedback should increase their feelings of competence. Consistent with this rationale, favorable task feedback has been found to positively relate to one’s perceived competence (Sansone, 1986). PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 13 Hypothesis 5: PJ fit positively relates to competence need satisfaction. Linking Need Satisfaction to Employee Outcomes As proposed by Gangé and Deci (2005), the satisfaction of the needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence is predicted to positively relate to job satisfaction. Similarly, several researchers have argued that employees’ whose needs are met should experience higher levels of job satisfaction than employees whose needs are not met (Locke, 1976; Cable & DeRue, 2002). Consistent with previous research demonstrating that each need satisfaction has an independent effect on well-being (Reis, Sheldon, Gable, Roscoe, & Ryan, 2000), we hypothesize that each of these need satisfactions positively relates to job satisfaction. Hypothesis 6: Autonomy need satisfaction positively relates to job satisfaction. Hypothesis 7: Relatedness need satisfaction positively relates to job satisfaction. Hypothesis 8: Competence need satisfaction positively relates to job satisfaction. Affective organizational commitment is commitment based on employees’ involvement and identification with the organization and reflects employees’ desires to stay with an organization because they want to stay (Meyer & Allen, 1991). We anticipated that autonomy need satisfaction would predict affective organizational commitment. Much of the organizational research on autonomy investigates organizational mechanisms that result in employee autonomy or supervisory support for autonomy (e.g., Deci, Connell, & Ryan, 1989). That is, autonomy is often tied to factors under the organization’s or supervisor’s control. As such, a person’s level of autonomy need satisfaction is predicted to positively relate to affective organizational commitment because, if employees left the organization, the organizational or supervisory support for PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 14 autonomy would be forfeited. Consistent with this rationale, a meta-analysis by Spector (1986) indicated that autonomy positively related to organizational commitment. Hypothesis 9: Autonomy need satisfaction positively relates to affective organizational commitment. Job performance is largely dependent on employees having the appropriate skills and competencies (e.g., Bartram, 2005; Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, & Sager, 1993). According to SDT, individuals who satisfy their needs for competence will be intrinsically motivated, and this intrinsic motivation leads to optimal performance (Deci & Ryan, 2001). Consistent with this rationale, past research has observed that competence need satisfaction positively relates to job performance (e.g., Baard, Deci, & Ryan, 2004). Hypothesis 10: Competence need satisfaction positively relates to job performance. Hypothesized Model B: Partial Mediation Linking PE Fit Directly to Employee Outcomes Consistent with the results of Cable and Edwards (2004), our competing Model B proposes several direct effects of PE fit on employee outcomes in addition to the indirect effects hypothesized above. Model B, therefore, contains all of the paths included in Model A but adds several direct paths from PE fit to employee outcomes. Below we provide theoretical rationale for linking the various types of fit directly to employee outcomes (see Figure 1). As a note of explanation, we did not hypothesize relations between fit and an employee outcome if Kristof-Brown et al.’s (2005) meta-analysis indicated that there was no relation between the two factors [e.g., PJ fit did not relate to PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 15 job performance in Kristof-Brown et al.’s (2005) meta-analysis, so we do not hypothesize this relation in the current study). We hypothesize that PO fit positively relates to affective organizational commitment. As noted by Kristof-Brown et al. (2005), fit with an organization should relate to organizational attitudes (e.g., organizational commitment). Employees who perceive themselves to fit with their organizations likely develop bonds with (Cable & DeRue, 2002), define themselves in terms of (Saks & Ashforth, 1997), and adopt the mission of (Cable & DeRue, 2002) their organizations. This increased compatibility likely increases their commitment to and desire to stay with the organization. We also expected PO fit to directly relate to job satisfaction. Specifically, researchers have identified a number of job satisfaction facets that includes, for example, opportunities for promotion, benefits, and pay (e.g., Spector, 1985). As such, we expect that the degree to which the organizations offer, and employees value, these features (PO fit), will be positively related to employee job satisfaction. Consistent with these ideas, research consistently observes that PO fit positively relates to organizational commitment and job satisfaction (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Hypothesis 11: PO fit positively relates to affective organizational commitment. Hypothesis 12: PO fit positively relates to overall job satisfaction. Research has identified coworkers as an important source of job satisfaction (e.g., Job Descriptive Index, Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969). Indeed, several measures of job satisfaction include items that refer to satisfaction with coworkers (e.g., Warr, Cook, & Wall, 1979). Coworkers are an important source of job satisfaction because employees often depend on and interact with coworkers as part of their jobs. As noted by Locke PE Fit and Need Satisfaction 16 (1976), coworkers will be more satisfied with one another when they perceive one another to share similar rather than dissimilar values. Such an increase in coworker satisfaction is expected to positively influence overall job satisfaction (Kalliath, Bluedorn, & Strube, 1999). We also hypothesized that PG fit would relate to employee performance. Employees who share similar values may perform at higher levels because they likely are better able to predict the behaviors of their coworkers, agree about which workplace behaviors are important, develop beneficial working relationships, and communicate with one another more effectively (Adkins et al., 1996). Consistent with this rationale, research demonstrates that PG fit positively correlates with job satisfaction and job performance (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Hypothesis 13: PG fit positively relates to job satisfaction. Hypothesis 14: PG fit positively relates to job performance. PJ fit theoretically is expected to positively relate to job attitudes (Edwards, 1991; Ostroff, Shin, & Kinicki, 2005) because perceptions about the job should relate to attitudes about the job (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Research consistently observes that PJ fit positively correlates with job satisfaction and organizational commitment (KristofBrown et al., 2005). The degree to which employees perceive that their abilities match the requirements of the job or that the job provides them with what they desire, they should be more satisfied with their jobs and more committed to their organizations. Hypothesis 15: PJ fit positively relates to affective organizational commitment. Hypothesis 16: PJ fit positively relates to job satisfaction. METHODS