Abstract
If the “people make the place,” what kinds of people (personalities) fit into what kinds of places (organizations), and how might the recruitment messages of the organization facilitate a better fit? The authors explored the extent to which recruitment strategy (realistic vs. traditional) and the Five-Factor model of personality (FFM) were related to subjective person–organization fit (P-O fit) with the four organizational cultures encompassed by Cameron and Quinn’s Competing Values model (CVM). Contrary to expectations, recruitment strategy did not have an effect on subjective P-O fit. Consistent with our hypotheses, (a) more agreeable and extraverted perceived greater fit with the clan culture, (b) more conscientious and less open persons perceived a better fit with a hierarchy culture, (c) less agreeable persons perceived a better fit with a market culture, and (d) persons who scored higher on openness perceived a better fit with an adhocracy culture.
Keywords
Achieving high levels of person–organization fit (P-O fit) is often seen as the key to retaining a workforce with the commitment necessary to meet the competitive challenges of the 21st century (Dineen & Soltis, 2010). Even with a global economic downturn lessening demand for labor, structural economic changes and shifting workforce demographics continue to make it difficult for many organizations to attract, acquire, develop, and retain the right mix of human resources to fulfill their mission (Ployhart, 2006). High replacement costs provide powerful incentives for organizations to seek new ways to improve their recruitment and selection processes (Tracey & Hinkin, 2008). Hence, it is critical for modern organizations to develop and implement successful communication strategies to recruit and retain new talent.
One productive approach to improving recruitment, selection, and retention practices involves efforts to achieve higher levels of fit between newcomers and the organization through more effective communication strategies (Cable & Judge, 1996; Kristof-Brown & Jansen, 2007; O’Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991). Meta-analyses of the P-O fit literature indicate that P-O fit is positively related to employee job performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors, and negatively related to intent to leave and turnover (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005; Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner, 2003). Hence, organizational communication practices that serve to elevate P-O fit can produce substantial returns with respect to the retention of human capital.
How organizations present their cultures using traditional media (Cable & Judge, 1996; Dineen & Soltis, 2010; Judge & Cable, 1997; Meyer, Hecht, Gill, & Toplonytsky, 2010; O’Reilly et al., 1991; Van Vianen, 2000) and, increasingly, the internet (Gardner, Reithel, Foley, Cogliser, & Walumbwa, 2009), has particularly important implications for the recruitment, selection, and retention of human resources. Information on an organization’s culture helps prospective and actual members to learn what the organization values and, hence, the extent to which those values are aligned with their own (Amos & Weathington, 2008). Indeed, organizations rely on a broad range of symbols, including language, logos, pictures, music, and other information presented through diverse media, including corporate websites (Young & Foot, 2006), to communicate knowledge about their culture to internal and external audiences (Myrsiades, 1987; Vaughn, 1995). Hence, the communication of such information enables prospective employees to assess the degree to which there is a fit between their personality, the values it reflects, and the values of the organization (Van Vianen, 2000; Van Vianen, Nijstad, & Voskuijl, 2008).
One approach to enhancing P-O fit involves the use of realistic job previews (RJP) to convey information about the organization that reflects both desirable and less desirable qualities (Reeve, Highhouse, & Brooks, 2006). RJPs encourage job applicants who represent a poor fit with the organization to select themselves out prior to employment (Breaugh, 2008). Although extensive research (Wanous, 1992) has explored the relationship between RJP and turnover, RJP scholars stress that research into the role that realistic versus traditional previews play in creating preemployment perceptions of P-O fit is still needed (Morse & Popovich, 2009).
Another common approach to improving employee retention is to adopt measures of values, personality, and job preferences to determine the extent of person–job (P-J) and P-O fit (Kristof-Brown & Jansen, 2007; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Verquer et al., 2003). The purpose of such endeavors is to screen for recruits whose attributes best match both the job requirements and the organizational culture. Previous research shows that early communication about organizational features such as job requirements, compensation, benefits, developmental opportunities, and the organizational culture is related to recruits’ sense of fit with the organization, as well as their satisfaction and retention once they join the firm (Breaugh, 2008; Judge & Cable, 1997; Reeve et al., 2006; Verquer et al., 2003).
In view of these trends, scholars have called for more research into the methods organizations use to communicate information that serves to attract potential recruits and yet is sufficiently realistic to enable those who are a poor fit with the culture to opt out of the applicant pool (Breaugh, 2008; Morse & Popovich, 2009; Reeve et al., 2006). Surprisingly, recruitment researchers have often overlooked the fact that job seekers serve as the “receivers” of recruitment messages. To address this shortcoming, scholars have called for RJP studies that explore microprocesses, such as how job seekers react to recruitment messages (Buda & Charnov, 2003; Highhouse, Stanton, & Reeve, 2004; Reeve et al., 2006). Toward this end, research has examined affective reactions displayed by recruits in response to realistic messages presented via web-based job fairs (Highhouse et al., 2004) and career websites (Reeve et al., 2006). In addition, scholars (e.g., Reeve et al., 2006) stress the need for greater attention to individual difference variables (e.g., need for cognition; Buda & Charnov, 2003), noting that recruitment research has not adequately examined how job seekers’ characteristics influence their reactions to positively and negatively framed messages that they receive about organizations.
The purpose of our study is to examine the effects of recruitment messages and personality as operationalized by the Five-Factor model (FFM) on the degree of subjective P-O fit potential recruits perceive with particular organizational cultures. Personality traits involve stable mental structures that provide general direction for one’s behavior, choices, and decision making (Barrick & Mount, 1991; McCrae & Costa, 1997, 2008). As such, the fit between an individual’s personality and an organization’s culture may provide fertile ground for attracting potential applicants (Judge & Cable, 1997). Drawing from the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA; Schneider, 1987, 2008) theory, Competing Values model (CVM; Cameron & Quinn, 2011), and Five-Factor model of personality (FFM; Costa & McRae, 1988), we assert that persons with a particular personality type will perceive a better fit with organizations that communicate cultural preferences that are most consistent with their personal values (Judge & Cable, 1997; Kristof-Brown & Jansen, 2007; O’Reilly et al., 1991). We also explore potential effects of the recruitment strategy (RJP vs. traditional messages) on subjective P-O fit.
Related Research
At the outset, it is important to describe a prior study of special significance to this research. Specifically, we extend Judge and Cable’s (1997) examination of the relationships between the FFM, job seekers’ cultural preferences as measured by the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP; O’Reilly et al., 1991), and P-O fit. The OCP is an ipsative measure of value preferences that uses a Q-sort methodology whereby respondents sort organizational culture attributes (e.g., working long hours, tolerance, etc.) into nine categories that range from 1 = very characteristic of me to 9 = very uncharacteristic of me. Based on the factor structure identified by O’Reilly and colleagues, eight dimensions of organizational culture preferences are formed: (a) innovation, (b) attention to detail, (c) outcome orientation, (d) aggressiveness, (e) supportiveness, (f) emphasis on rewards, (g) team orientation, and (h) decisiveness.
Judge and Cable (1997) collected data from students interviewing with recruiters across three time periods. Initially, job seekers’ completed self-report measures of the FFM traits and their organizational culture preferences. Peers who knew them well also independently rated their personality. Three weeks later participants used the OCP to report the values of, and their attraction to, an organization with which they had just interviewed. Three months later they reported their attraction to the firm they had previously rated, whether they had received a job offer from this firm, and if so, whether they had accepted it. In addition to the measures of organizational attraction, measures of objective P-O fit (i.e., actual fit, or the fit that is reflected by ascertaining the congruence between the respondents’ separate assessments of individual and organizational values) and subjective P-O fit (i.e., perceived fit based on the respondents’ direct assessments of how well they fit or would fit in the organization) were computed.
Given the common focus of the current and Judge and Cable’s (1997) studies on the relationships between the FFM, organizational culture, and P-O fit, the former constitutes an extension of the latter. Specifically, we examine the extent to which the relationship between the FFM and organizational culture preferences continue to hold in the era of web-based recruiting (Dineen & Soltis, 2010). Accordingly, we use a web-based platform to present participants with organizational profiles depicting alternative cultural types. Other key differences between the current study and Judge and Cable’s include: (a) the use of Cameron and Quinn’s (2011) CVM as opposed to O’Reilly’s (1991) dimensions as a taxonomy for studying cultural preferences; (b) the utilization of subjective P-O fit, as opposed to organizational attraction, as the focal dependent variable; and (c) the adoption of an experimental design as opposed to a field survey. Despite these differences, we rely on the underlying theory for Judge and Cable’s hypotheses and their results in advancing our hypotheses, as described below.
Theoretical Foundations
Person–Organization Fit
The literature on organizational choice and P-O fit shows that job applicants are attracted to work settings that are consistent with their personal attributes, and with their core values in particular (Amos & Weathington, 2008). Applicant perceptions of fit with an organization’s culture can be key determinants of organizational attraction, job choice, job satisfaction, and retention (Cable & Judge, 1996; Van Vianen, 2000; Van Vianen et al., 2008).
According to Schneider’s (1987, 2008) ASA model, a key determinant of the relationship between the person and organization is the fit between the individual’s personality and the modal personality of the organization’s members. Schneider considers the founder to be a crucial influence on an organization’s culture and assumes that its attributes are reflections of the founder’s personality and that members are drawn to the mission, strategy, structure, and culture the founder establishes. He contends that organizations are relatively homogeneous with respect to personality and that they can be reliably differentiated based on the modal personality of members. Despite the role of personality in P-O fit, there is scant research on the role it may play in an applicant’s decision to join and remain with an organization (Van Vianen et al., 2008).
With the rise of web-based recruiting (Ployhart, 2006), increased empirical attention has been devoted to the utility of the internet as a medium for disseminating organizational messages to potential recruits. Dineen and colleagues (Dineen, Ash, & Noe, 2002) explored how bogus feedback obtained from an online self-assessment of applicants’ potential P-O fit with a fictitious company impacted their attraction to the firm. Both feedback level and objective P-O fit were positively related to organizational attraction, and these relationships were fully mediated by subjective P-O fit.
Web-based job postings were used by Dineen and associates (Dineen, Ling, Ash, & DelVecchio, 2007; Dineen & Noe, 2009) to explore the effects that the customization of fit information (e.g., person–organization, needs–supplies, and demands–abilities fit) exerts on applicant viewing behavior, organizational attraction, and application decisions. Customization reflects a key aspect of interactivity whereby recruitment information is targeted to individual job seekers (Dineen & Noe, 2009). Fit information customization involves the communication of information suggesting objective fit between the job seeker and the organization in response to job seeker input about abilities and preferences (Dineen et al., 2007). The results revealed that fit information customization effectively provided RJP that caused poorly fitting applicants to reduce their level of attraction and application rates (Dineen et al., 2007). Overall, this stream of research indicates that the type of information recruits obtain from organization websites is a key determinant of their attraction to and perceived fit with the organization.
RJP Recruitment
One approach that has been shown to enhance the prospects for P-O fit is realistic recruitment (Breaugh, 2008; Wanous, 1992). In contrast to traditional recruitment strategies that seek to “sell” recruits on the organization, the goal of RJP is to provide a balanced picture that presents both positive and negative aspects of the organization. A substantial amount of empirical evidence suggests that the practice of providing recruits with realistic as opposed to overly positive descriptions of the organization and job results in higher levels of job performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and retention (for meta-analyses, see Phillips, 1998; Wanous, Poland, Premack, & Davis, 1992).
A variety of reasons have been posited for these results. Realistic previews are believed to screen out persons with needs that are incompatible with the demands of the culture and job by enabling applicants to make a more informed choice about whether or not to accept a job offer (Morse & Popovich, 2009; Wanous, 1992; Wanous et al., 1992). RJPs are also assumed to elicit a perception that the organization is honest and trustworthy. Moreover, the fact that the organization expends resources to formulate the preview is assumed to communicate that it really cares about employees. Finally, realistic previews are believed to lower overly optimistic expectations to levels that are more likely to be fulfilled, encourage recruits to adjust the values they assign to particular job or organizational attributes, and help them to anticipate the undesirable attributes. In other words, realistic previews may heighten a recruit’s desire for what an organization and job offers, dampen enthusiasm for what they do not, and thereby lessen the likelihood of disappointment (Morse & Popovich, 2009).
Clearly, the realistic recruitment strategy offers a number of benefits for organizations that are struggling to achieve an adequate fit between their recruits and the organization and are consequently encountering difficulties in retaining adequate levels of personnel. However, a potential disadvantage of such previews is that the highest quality applicants may be less likely to pursue jobs for which negative information has been presented, especially when alternative job opportunities are plentiful. Thus, organizations that practice realistic recruitment run the risk of losing out on a disproportionately large number of exceptional job candidates. On the flip side, the odds are enhanced that superior candidates who choose the organization will be satisfied with their work, committed to the organization, perform at high levels, and stay in the job (Morse & Popovich, 2009; Phillips, 1998; Wanous et al., 1992). To understand fully how RJP can facilitate these desirable outcomes, however, it is necessary to consider the types of organizational cultures that may be realistically presented to recruits.
Organizational Culture
Organizational culture is comprised of the assumptions, stated or unstated values, norms, customs and rituals, stories and myths, metaphors and symbols, climate, and tangible signs (artifacts) of organizational members and their behaviors (Schein, 2010). The underlying values and assumptions of the organization are reflected in the ways in which language and symbols, myths, routines and procedures, rites and rituals, and performance norms make the organization unique (Schein, 2010). Several approaches have been generated over the years to examine organizational culture (see Detert, Schroeder, & Mauriel, 2000, for an integrative review). We use the CVM proposed by Cameron and Quinn (2011) because it integrates many of the dimensions of culture proposed by others and is empirically sound (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1991; Zammuto & Krakower, 1991). Prior studies have investigated how congruence between employees’ value preferences and organizational culture (operationalized by the CVM) influence assorted affective outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement, and turnover intentions (Harris & Mossholder, 1996; Meyer et al., 2010) and P-O fit (van Vuuren, Veldkamp, de Jong, & Seydel, 2007). However, the relationships between personality and perceived fit to such cultures have not been heretofore explored.
The CVM has 39 indicators of effectiveness that vary along two major dimensions and join together to form four main clusters (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). The first dimension distinguishes the effectiveness criteria of control, stability, and order from the criteria that stress discretion, flexibility, and dynamism. Whereas some organizations are considered to be effective if they are mechanistic, stable, and predictable (e.g., government agencies, universities), others are deemed to be effective if they are organic, changing, and adaptable (e.g., Nike, Microsoft). The extremes of this continuum range from organizational stability and longevity on one end to organizational plasticity and versatility on the other.
The second dimension distinguishes between effectiveness criteria with an external orientation, rivalry, and differentiation from criteria that emphasize an internal orientation, unity, and integration (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Whereas some organizations are considered effective when they have harmonious internal attributes (e.g., Hewlett-Packard was recognized for having a consistent “H-P way” of doing things), others are deemed effective when they focus on competing or interacting with external entities (e.g., Honda and Toyota take pride in “thinking globally but acting locally” because doing so enables them to compete and adapt to both the local and global environments). This continuum ranges from the extremes of organizational independence and separation on one end to organizational cohesion and harmony on the other.
These two dimensions create four cultural quadrants (clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market), each reflecting a particular set of organizational effectiveness indicators that define what people value about an organization’s performance and how they judge it. Each of these values are polar opposites (i.e., flexibility vs. stability, internal vs. external orientation) and thus can be viewed as competing values that reflect the organization’s set of values, assumptions, and orientations (i.e., organizational culture). For instance, the clan, with its emphasis on cohesion, morale, participation, and loyalty, falls within the internal/stable quadrant, which lies at the opposite extreme from the market, which falls within the external/flexible quadrant and stresses production, competition, and goal achievement. Furthermore, the hierarchy’s focus on rules, policies, procedures, efficiency, and control is the direct opposite of the adhocracy, which stresses innovation, flexibility, creativity, and risk.
As our discussion of the ASA model indicates, perceptions of organizational culture have been found to be key determinants of P-O fit (Schneider, 1987; Van Vianen, 2000; Van Vianen et al., 2008). In light of the basic differences between the clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market culture described by Cameron and Quinn (2011), we predict that potential recruits may have definite preferences for one or more cultural types and that these preferences will be reflected by ratings of P-O fit. Nonetheless, due to a dearth of research into organizational culture preferences, we do not have a sufficient theoretical or empirical basis for positing which cultural types will elicit the highest versus lowest levels of perceived fit. Therefore, we predict that organizational culture will account for significant differences in P-O fit, but we do not advance specific hypotheses about the nature of these differences. Accordingly, we explore the following research question:
Research Question 1: Are there differences in the extent to which potential recruits perceive a fit with particular organizational culture profiles?
Five-Factor Model
The FFM has provided a unifying framework in the study of personality across time and diverse populations (McCrae & Costa, 1997, 2008), making it a useful starting point for examining the influence of personality on cultural preferences. The factors of the FFM include Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience.
Extraversion represents the tendency to be sociable, gregarious, assertive, active, talkative, and directive. At the opposite end of the extraversion dimension is introversion, which refers to persons who are shy, reserved, quiet, and cautious. Agreeableness refers to the propensity of an individual to defer to others; it encompasses the traits associated with being likable, courteous, adaptable, cooperative, cheerful, warm, and tolerant. Those individuals who score low are described as engaging in “hostile noncompliance” because they are uncooperative, cold, irritable, disagreeable, antagonistic, and short-tempered. Conscientiousness is a measure of reliability. Highly conscientious individuals tend to be responsible, dependable, organized, persevering, and willing to achieve. Persons who are low in conscientiousness tend to be less thorough, irresponsible, careless, easily distracted, disorganized, and unreliable. Neuroticism refers to the extent to which people are emotional, nervous, and insecure. This dimension is sometimes positively framed and labeled emotional stability, which reflects a person’s ability to endure stress. The final factor, openness to experience, involves a person’s range of interests and fascination with novelty. Individuals who score high on openness tend to be creative, imaginative, nonconforming, intelligent, broad-minded, flexible, curious, and artistically sensitive; those who score low are more inclined to be conventional, resistant to change, closed-minded, and comfortable with the familiar.
Hypotheses
Recruitment Strategy
Consistent with information processing theory (Fiske & Taylor, 2008) and prior evidence from the RJP literature (Morse & Popovich, 2009; Phillips, 1998; Wanous et al., 1992), we anticipate that persons who are exposed to positive and negative information about an organization will form less favorable impressions and discern lower levels of P-O fit than those who receive only positive information. That is, consistent with Schneider’s (1987, 2008) ASA model and research that demonstrates a positive relationship between organizational attraction and P-O fit (Carless, 2005; Dineen et al., 2002; Schein & Diamante, 1988), we anticipate that RJPs will lessen the attractiveness of particular cultures to potential recruits, who in turn will see lower levels of fit with the culture because its unattractive features will compare unfavorably with the types of organizational attributes they desire. Accordingly, we advance
Hypothesis 1: Realistic as opposed to traditional recruitment strategies will produce lower ratings of subjective P-O fit.
Personality Preferences for Organizational Culture
Given the fundamental differences in the clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market cultures described previously, there are likely to be differences in the extent to which potential recruits see themselves fitting into these cultures. We anticipate that people will have strong preferences for one or more cultural types and that such preferences will be reflected in their perceptions of P-O fit. Furthermore, our hypotheses are based on the premise that knowledge of specific personality attributes will account for variance in individual ratings of P-O fit. Our hypotheses and the associated rationale for each of the FFM traits are described below.
Extraversion
Prior research has related extraversion to performance in occupations where interactions with others are integral to the job (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001). Reflecting on these findings, Barrick et al. (2001, p. 11) observe that “if working in a team comprises an important component of the work, higher scores on extraversion would be expected to be related to more effective teamwork.” Hence, given the desire of extraverts to socialize with others, we anticipate they will perceive a good fit with the friendly, family-like atmosphere and the emphasis on teamwork that characterize the clan culture.
Barrick, Mount, and Gupta’s (2003) meta-analysis of the relationship between the FFM and Holland’s occupational types provides additional support. Holland’s theory asserts that the structure of personality can be inferred from the clustering of vocational interests and that job satisfaction and turnover intentions depend upon the extent to which an employee’s personality is congruent with the occupational environment. Hence, he used vocational interests to classify people and work environments into six types: realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional (Holland, 1996). Consistent with our reasoning that extraverts will be attracted to the clan culture, Barrick et al. found that extraverts prefer social vocations and work environments—a finding that was replicated in recent studies (Wille, De Fruyt, & Feys, 2010; Woods & Hampson, 2010). Similarly, Berings and associates (Berings, De Fruyt, & Bouwen, 2004) found that extraversion was related to work values, reflecting a preference for teams.
As noted above, the study of most direct relevance to the current research is Judge and Cable’s (1997) examination of the relationships between the FFM and cultural preferences as measured by the OCP (O’Reilly et al., 1991). As predicted, Judge and Cable found that more as opposed to less extraverted job seekers were more attracted to team-oriented cultures. However, noting that extraverts are also bold, assertive, and forceful, they found that extraverts are less attracted to supportive cultures. Since clans are both supportive and team oriented, Judge and Cable’s findings have contradictory implications with respect to extraverts’ perceived fit with such cultures. Further support for our expectations, however, is provided by Lucas and colleagues’ (Lucas, Diener, Grob, Suh, & Shao, 2000) finding that the affiliation facet of extraversion, which we expect to be related to a preference for working in teams, loaded on a higher-order extraversion factor, along with two additional facets—ascendance and venturesome. On balance, we expect extraverts to be attracted to the team-oriented and affiliation components of the clan culture more than they are put off by the supportive elements of such cultures. Accordingly, we advance
Hypothesis 2: Extraversion is positively related to subjective P-O fit for a clan culture.
Agreeableness
Given the tendency of people who score high on agreeableness to be cooperative, courteous, warm, and trusting (Barrick et al., 2001), we expect the clan culture with its emphasis on teamwork, cohesion, loyalty, and morale (Cameron & Quinn, 2011) to be highly appealing. Consistent with this prediction, Judge and Cable (1997) found that agreeableness was positively related to job seekers’ attraction to supportive and team-oriented organizational cultures. Barrick and associates’ (2003) meta-analysis and subsequent research (Wille et al., 2010) likewise support their prediction that agreeableness would be positively related to preferences for social vocations and work environments. Finally, Berings and colleagues (2004) showed that agreeableness is positively related to community and team preferences.
We also anticipate those who are high in agreeableness, given their focus on cooperation, will find the market culture’s emphasis on competition (and potential conflict) and winning to be a relatively poor fit for their personality. Conversely, we expect that less agreeable persons who tend to be competitive and are comfortable with conflict will perceive a good fit with the market culture. These predictions are consistent with Judge and Cable’s (1997) finding that agreeableness was negatively related to job seekers’ attraction to aggressive, outcome-oriented, and decisive organizational cultures. Barrick et al. (2003) likewise identified a negative relationship when agreeableness was regressed on Holland’s enterprising type, which reflects a preference for competitive work environments. Similarly, Berings et al.’s (2004) study of the relationship between the FFM and work values revealed that agreeableness was negatively related to preferences for competition. Based on this reasoning and research, we offer
Hypothesis 3: Agreeableness is positively related to subjective P-O fit for a clan culture.
Hypothesis 4: Agreeableness is negatively related to subjective P-O fit for a market culture.
Conscientiousness
The focus of the hierarchy culture is efficiency, stability, and reliable performance (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). We expect that conscientious individuals will perceive a good fit between this culture and their personality. Prior research has found positive relationships between conscientiousness and job seekers’ attraction to detail- and outcome-oriented cultures (Judge & Cable, 1997). Similarly, Barrick and colleagues (2003) and later studies (Wille et al., 2010; Woods & Hampson, 2010) confirmed that conscientiousness is positively related to Holland’s (1996) conventional vocational type, which reflects preferences for precision, attention to detail, order, and organization—qualities of the hierarchy culture. Thus, we advance
Hypothesis 5: Conscientiousness is positively related to subjective P-O fit for a hierarchy culture.
Neuroticism
Given the propensity of more neurotic persons to respond to stressful situations with negative affect, we anticipate that they will find the emphasis on stability, structure, and predictability that characterize the hierarchy culture to be highly appealing. Support is provided by Berings and colleagues’ (2004) findings that neuroticism is positively related to a need for structure and a preference for stability. Moreover, we expect that they will view the relatively ambiguous and unstructured qualities of the adhocracy culture as a poor fit for their personality and values (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Consistent with this expectation, Judge and Cable (1997) found a negative relationship between neuroticism and job seekers’ preferences for innovative cultures. Further support for this assertion is provided by Wille and colleagues’ (2010) finding that neuroticism is negatively related to preferences for enterprising vocations as measured by Holland’s (1996) Vocational Interest Scale. Therefore, we advance
Hypothesis 6: Neuroticism is positively related to subjective P-O fit for a hierarchy culture.
Hypothesis 7: Neuroticism is negatively related to subjective P-O fit for an adhocracy culture.
Openness to experience
Persons who score high on openness to experience tend to be creative, imaginative, and broad-minded, whereas those who score low are more conventional, closed-minded, and comfortable with the familiar (Barrick & Mount, 1991). Because the adhocracy values innovation, flexibility, creativity, and entrepreneurship, we expect that those who score high on openness will see a fit between their quest for creativity and novel experiences and this culture. Judge and Cable (1997) likewise hypothesized that openness to experience would be positively related to job seekers’ preferences for innovative cultures and negatively related to preferences for detail-oriented cultures, although only the prior prediction was supported. Contrary to expectations, Judge and Cable found that job seekers who were more as opposed to less open were attracted to detail-oriented cultures—described as analytical, precise, and requiring attention to detail. Still, we believe the negative relationship between openness and ratings of the hierarchy culture they expected and we propose is more intuitively appealing and consistent with the openness to experience construct. Consistent with these expectations, Barrick et al. (2003) and subsequent studies (Wille et al., 2010; Woods &Hampson, 2010) found that openness to experience was positively related to Holland’s (1996) investigative and artistic vocational types (both of which reflect preferences for abstraction, nonconformity, originality, and insight) and negatively related to the conventional type.
We also anticipate that such individuals are likely to find the structure, predictability, and stability of the hierarchy to be unappealing. In contrast, these attributes may cause less open persons, who are more comfortable with the conventional and the familiar (McCrae & Costa, 2008), to perceive a higher level of fit with the routine, structure, and predictability of the hierarchy culture (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Consistent with these assertions, Bering and colleagues (2004) found that openness to experience was negatively related to work values, reflecting preferences for structure and stability. Accordingly, we advance
Hypothesis 8: Openness to experience is positively related to subjective P-O fit for an adhocracy culture.
Hypothesis 9: Openness to experience is negatively related to subjective P-O fit for a hierarchy culture.
Method
Participants
Participants were undergraduate business students from a medium-sized, southeastern U.S. public university enrolled in management and management information systems classes who volunteered to participate in exchange for extra course credit. Given that students are targeted for the web-based recruitment, they constitute an appropriate sample for exploring our hypotheses. 1
The experiment was divided into two phases. During Phase 1, the recruitment strategy and culture treatments were presented to 265 undergraduate students and measures of subjective P-O fit were administered. We also collected demographic data, including gender, race and ethnicity, age, and academic major. To provide an incentive for participation, a raffle was held whereby two participants were randomly chosen to receive one of two prizes, a Visor/Palm pilot personal organizer or dinner for four at a local restaurant.
Phase 2 was conducted 2 weeks later to reduce the potential bias from common method variance (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Podsakoff, & Lee, 2003). Of the participants who completed Phase 1, 234 also took part in Phase 2. During this phase, participants completed the FFM measure (Neuroticism-Extroversion-Openness [NEO] Personality Inventory-Revised [NEO-PI-R]; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and additional demographic measures of work experience and academic standing (freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior). Only participants who completed both phases of the study were included in the raffle and the subsequent analysis.
The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 37 years, with a mean of 20.48 years (SD = 1.96). Half of the participants were male. With respect to race and ethnicity, 82.0% were Caucasian, 12.4% African American, 2.1% Asian American or Native American, and 3.4% other. The breakdown for academic standing was as follows: .9% freshmen, 47.9% sophomores, 32.1% juniors, 18.8% seniors, and .4% graduate students. Most participants had some part-time work experience, including 1.7% with more than 10 years, 13.7% with 6 to 10 years, 48.2% with 3 to 5 years, 19.2% with 1 to 2 years, 11.2% with less than 1 year, and 6.0% with none. The majority (50.4%) had no full-time work experience, followed by 25.6% with less than 1 year, 14.5% with 1 to 2 years, 8.1% with 3 to 5 years, and 1.3% with more than 10 years. Most (75.2%) were business majors, with 18.8% liberal arts majors and 6.0% undecided or other.
Procedure
We employed a mixed-factor design with recruitment strategy (realistic vs. traditional job previews) serving as a between-subjects factor and organizational culture (clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market) serving as a four-level within-subjects factor. We included organizational culture as a within-subjects factor to enable the comparative assessment of subjective P-O fit for each respondent across the four cultural profiles.
Students were solicited to sign up for the experimental sessions. We randomly generated various combinations of recruitment (realistic vs. traditional) treatments and orderings of the four organizational culture profiles in advance. Participants were assigned to one of the randomly generated treatment combinations as they enrolled in the study.
During Phase 1, participants logged into the experimental webpage, where they submitted their name to make it possible to award course credit (confidentiality was assured) and provided demographic data (gender, race and ethnicity, age, academic major). They were then directed to one of eight organizational profiles created from a combination of the OCP and recruitment strategy treatments (described in more detail below). Upon reviewing the first organizational culture profile, participants completed the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI; Quinn & Spreitzer, 1991) to provide a manipulation check for organizational culture. Next, they completed the subjective P-O fit scale for the profiled organization. The second, third, and fourth organizational culture profiles were then presented sequentially and were each evaluated again using the subjective P-O fit measure.
During Phase 2, participants completed the personality measures. To avoid potential biases arising from order effects, the order in which the personality measures were presented was randomized. Phase 2 concluded with the completion of the final demographic measures.
Manipulations
Consistent with recent recruitment research (e.g., Dineen & Noe, 2009), we introduced the manipulations through custom-designed web-based OCPs. The treatments included the two recruitment strategies (realistic vs. traditional) and the four organizational culture types (clan, hierarchy, market, and adhocracy). To manipulate the cultural types, participants were randomly directed to a webpage that presented one of the four organizational profiles. The recruitment strategy treatment was likewise randomly assigned initially and then held constant across the four successive culture conditions. The manipulation of organizational culture involved varying the form of leadership, source of bonding, value drivers, effectiveness criteria, and managerial assumptions to reflect Quinn and Cameron (2011) conceptualization of the four cultural types. After the respondent evaluated the first profile, the second, third, and fourth webpages profiling the remaining cultures were presented and rated.
For the recruitment strategy manipulation, participants exposed to the traditional treatment were provided with only positive information about the focal organization. In contrast, for the RJP treatment, participants received all of the positive information conveyed under the traditional condition, plus information about some potential liabilities of the culture. The profile also included a statement about the organization’s belief in presenting a realistic preview containing both positive and potentially negative features of the culture. Because the recruitment strategy used in the initial profile was held constant for the remaining profiles, it constitutes a between-subjects treatment with two levels (traditional vs. RJP).
Prior to the main study, we conducted a pilot test of the software and manipulations with 117 undergraduate students. Participants in the pilot test were presented with all of the experimental materials and measures. Based on their feedback and the preliminary results, minor corrections to the experimental software were completed prior to the main study.
Measures
OCAI
The OCAI was developed to serve as a measure of perceived organizational culture as conceptualized by the CVM (Cameron & Quinn, 2011; Quinn & Spreitzer, 1991). We administered the OCAI after participants read the initial profile to serve as a manipulation check to determine whether the featured profile reflected the attributes associated with its cultural type. Participants did not complete the OCAI following the second, third, and fourth cultural profiles due to concerns that the experimental materials would appear redundant and excessively long, thereby inducing respondent fatigue.
Respondents used the OCAI to assess the six basic dimensions of organizational culture described by Cameron and Quinn (2011). The OCAI includes six items that measure the following dimensions: (1) the dominant characteristics of the organization (i.e., what the organization is like overall), (2) organizational leadership, (3) the management of employees or the style that reflects the nature of the work environment and how employees are treated, (4) the organization glue or forces that bond organizational members together, (5) the strategic emphases that focus attention on particular areas to be highlighted in the organization’s strategy, and (6) the criteria for success that determine how success is evaluated and for which organizational members get rewarded. Each of the six items includes four response alternatives that reflect the corresponding attributes of clan, market, hierarchy, and adhocracy on the particular OCAI dimension being evaluated. For each dimension, respondents were instructed to divide 100 points across the 4 alternatives to indicate how much the attributes described are characteristic of the focal organization. The number of points that a respondent allocates to the responses associated with a given culture are then averaged across items to obtain an overall indication of the extent to which qualities of a particular cultural type are present in the focal organization. Prior research (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1991; Zammuto & Krakower, 1991) provides evidence of the OCAI’s reliability and validity. Following the procedures employed by Quinn and Spreitzer, and Zammuto and Krackower, we computed coefficient alphas for the OCIA by assessing the degree of internal consistency for the percentages allocated to response alternatives corresponding to particular cultural types across the six items described above. In our study, we obtained coefficient alphas for particular cultural types as follows: clan (α = .81), market (α = .79), hierarchy (α = .68), and adhocracy (α = .72).
Personality
The NEO-PI-R (Costa & McCrae, 1992) was used (with permission) to operationalize the FFM. The NEO-PI-R is a 60-item instrument that includes 12 items per dimension and employs 5-point Likert-type response anchors (1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree). Extensive reliability and validity evidence for the NEO-PI-R is available (Costa & McCrae, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 2008). The internal consistency estimates for each personality dimension measured in the current study were extraversion (α = .73), agreeableness (α = .72), conscientiousness (α = .77), neuroticism (α = .84), and openness to experience (α = .64).
Subjective P-O fit
P-O fit was measured using three items developed by Cable and Judge (1996) to provide a subjective assessment of the extent to which the respondent would fit into the profiled culture. A sample item is, “To what degree do your values, goals, and personality ‘match’ or fit this organization and the employees in this organization?” Cable and Judge provide evidence for the validity and reliability of this scale. Responses ranged from 1 (not at all) to 7 (completely). The reliability estimates for P-O fit within the particular cultures were as follows: clan (α = .75), hierarchy (α = .73), market (α = .84), and adhocracy (α = .73).
Control variables
We controlled for gender (0 = female, 1 = male) as prior research reveals that gender differences in personality traits arise across cultures (Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001). We also included work experience as a control because we suspected exposure to different cultures in the workplace could impact cultural preferences. To explore the effects of work experience, we divided participants into two groups: participants who reported some level of full-time work experience (coded as 1) and those who did not (coded as 0). As recommended by Spector and Brannick (2011), we also conducted the regression analysis without the control variables. Note that the pattern of results was the same with and without the control variables.
Results
Table 1 provides a summary of the means, standard deviations, reliability coefficients, and correlations for the control variables, FFM, and P-O fit for each cultural type. In general, the correlations of the FFM with P-O fit for particular cultural types are in the posited directions.
Means, Standard Deviations, and Coefficient Alphas for Study Variables.
Note: N = 234. Coefficient alpha internal consistency coefficients appear in italics on the diagonal.
Gender coding: 0 = female, 1 = male.
Full-time work experience: 0 = none, 1 = some.
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Manipulation Check
We administered the OCAI after participants viewed the first profiled organization to ascertain whether the manipulation effectively communicated the attributes of the featured culture. For each cultural type, t tests indicated significant differences (p < .001) in the mean OCAI ratings of the profiled, as opposed to nonprofiled, cultures. That is, participants who received the clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market treatments rated the culture as possessing higher levels of the attributes associated with these cultures than participants who viewed different cultural profiles. Specifically, the mean scores for treatment groups who received the clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market profiles were 312.58, 258.13, 259.60, and 234.24, respectively, whereas the mean scores for groups who did not receive the focal profile were 106.07, 111.12, 98.51, and 126.46. These results indicate that the manipulation of organizational culture was effective.
Tests of the Recruitment Strategy and Organizational Culture Hypotheses
To test the recruitment strategy hypotheses, we conducted a repeated-measures ANOVA (analysis of variance). Table 2 presents univariate F tests and partial eta-squares for the within- and between- subjects effects, and multivariate F tests (Wilks’ Lambda) for the within-subjects effects on the repeated measure of subjective P-O fit. Table 3 provides a summary of the cell sizes, cell means, standard deviations, and confidence intervals for recruitment strategy by organizational culture.
Repeated Measures ANOVA (Analysis of Variance): Recruitment Strategy by Organizational Culture for Subjective Person–Organization Fit.
Note: N = 213 due to missing values
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Because Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity was significant for subjective P-O fit (person–organization fit; Mauchly's W = .914, Approximate χ2 = 27.40, p = .000), the Greenhouse–Geisser corrected F test is reported for the within-subjects main and interaction effects.
Organizational Culture × Recruitment Strategy: Cell Sizes, Means, and Standard Deviations for Subjective Person–Organization Fit.
Note: The least significant difference (LSD) post hoc comparison method revealed the following significant differences between cell means: MClan > MMarket = MHierarchy = MAdhocracy.
As Table 2 indicates, significant effects of organizational culture were found for subjective P-O fit. Hence, an affirmative answer was obtained with respect to our basic research question in that there are differences in the extent to which potential recruits perceive a fit with particular cultural types. Post hoc analyses using the least significant differences (LSD) test revealed that the means for subjective P-O fit with the clan culture were significantly higher than the means for the other cultures. No significant differences were found among the means for the other cultures. With respect to Hypothesis 1, Table 2 indicates that the F test for recruitment strategy was not significant. Thus, no support for the prediction that RJPs would produce lower levels of subjective P-O fit than traditional recruitment messages was obtained. Moreover, the recruitment strategy by organizational culture interaction was also insignificant.
Tests of the Organizational Culture and FFM Hypotheses
Our FFM hypotheses were tested through a series of regression analyses (see Table 4). The control variables of gender and work experience and the FFM personality variables were entered simultaneously into the regression equation to assess the relationships between these personality factors and subjective P-O fit for particular cultural types.
Predictors of Subjective P-O Fit (Person–Organization Fit) for the Four Culture Types.
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
FFM and P-O fit to the clan culture
As Table 4 indicates, the control variables were not significantly related to P-O fit for the clan culture. Consistent with Hypotheses 2 and 3, respectively, the results for the FFM revealed that extraversion and agreeableness were significantly related to subjective P-O fit. Thus, as predicted, people who were more, as opposed to less, extraverted and agreeable perceived a good fit with the clan culture. An unexpected positive relationship between neuroticism and perceived fit with the clan culture was also found, suggesting that more versus less neurotic persons perceived a better fit with the clan culture.
FFM and P-O fit to the market culture
Hypothesis 4 predicted that agreeableness would be negatively related to subjective P-O fit with a market culture. As Table 4 indicates, agreeableness did emerge as a negative predictor of perceived fit with the market culture.
FFM and P-O fit to the hierarchy culture
Hypotheses 5 and 6 posit that P-O fit with the hierarchy culture will be positively related to conscientiousness and neuroticism, respectively, whereas Hypothesis 9 predicts a negative relationship with openness to experience. Consistent with Hypotheses 5 and 9, respectively, conscientiousness emerged as a positive predictor of perceived fit for the hierarchy culture, whereas openness was negatively related to P-O fit (see Table 4). No support was obtained for the predicted relationship for neuroticism (Hypothesis 6), however. These results suggest that recruits who are more, as opposed to less, conscientious perceive a greater fit with the hierarchy culture, whereas those who are more open perceive a poorer fit, as predicted.
FFM and P-O fit to the adhocracy culture
Hypotheses 7 and 8, respectively, predict that neuroticism is negatively, and openness to experience positively, related to P-O fit with the adhocracy culture. Consistent with Hypothesis 8, openness emerged as a significant and positive predictor of perceived fit with the adhocracy culture (see Table 4). However, the posited negative relationship between neuroticism and perceived fit with the adhocracy culture (Hypothesis 7) failed to emerge. Thus, some evidence was obtained to suggest that more, as opposed to less, open persons report a higher level of fit with an adhocracy culture.
Discussion
Organizational Culture Results
A basic research question explored in this study asked whether potential recruits’ perceptions of P-O fit would differ across cultural types. We obtained an affirmative answer, as participants were shown to perceive a higher degree of fit with the clan culture than any other culture. The mean ratings of P-O fit for the other cultures did not differ. In a national study of 4-year colleges and universities, Zammuto and Krakower (1991) found that whereas small institutions generated comparatively high standard scores for the clan (or group) culture, low to moderate scores were more common among large institutions. To the degree that these findings generalize to nonacademic settings, they imply that persons with pronounced preferences for the clan culture may perceive a higher degree of fit with small versus large organizations, presumably because they favor the family-like atmosphere found in such cultures.
Recruitment Strategy Results
Contrary to Hypothesis 1, respondents presented with the traditional versus the RJP strategy did not perceive a greater fit with the profiled organizations. Previously, RJP proponents have asserted that RJP helps job seekers gain more balanced information on the strengths and weaknesses of particular cultures (Wanous, 1992), making it easier for them to ascertain a poor fit. However, the supplemental information regarding potential limitations of particular cultures provided in the RJP treatment of the current study had no effect on subjective P-O fit. Note that these findings contrast with those we obtained in a related study (Gardner et al., 2009) that revealed RJPs depressed the reported attraction of potential recruits to the four cultural types as depicted by the organizational profiles. Together, these results suggest that although RJPs have a negative impact on organizational attraction, they do not necessarily alter the degree of fit perceived by potential recruits with respect to the organizational cultures profiled.
Although the lack of negative effects of RJP with respect to P-O fit may initially appear to be a positive outcome, proponents who argue that RJP facilitates more realistic organizational assessments (Phillips, 1998; Wanous, 1992; Wanous et al., 1992) would most likely conclude otherwise. Prior research suggests that RJP contributes to a process of self-selection whereby recruits avoid unattractive cultures, thereby increasing the potential for P-O fit upon entry into the organization (Verquer et al., 2003). Moreover, to the extent that RJP facilitates greater P-O fit, it provides a promising approach for lessening employee replacement costs (Tracey & Hinkin, 2008). However, in the present study, no evidence of these positive effects of RJP was obtained, despite the reduced level of attraction observed in our prior study (Gardner et al., 2009). Perhaps the potential limitations of the assorted cultures were not seen as sufficiently negative to discourage persons who valued the culture’s strengths from perceiving a better fit with the profiled culture than the alternative cultures presented.
Support for this explanation is provided by an experiment by Buda and Charnov (2003) that examined the effects of message framing within RJP on attitudes (attractiveness, likelihood of acceptance of a job offer, expectations) toward the profiled job. The results revealed that only the negatively framed RJP lowered job attitudes; post-RJP attitudes for participants who received the positively framed message remained unchanged from pre-RJP attitudes. Hence, the fact that the RJP message in the current study was likewise positively framed may explain why no differences between the levels of P-O fit for the traditional recruitment message were observed. Thus, it is possible that the limitations portrayed in the profiles were actually perceived as attractive, or at least not unattractive, features for some of the participants. Future research should explore how RJP profiles can be optimally framed in terms of positive versus negative content to produce positive affective reactions among recruits sufficient to attract those who are likely to fit the culture while helping those who fit poorly to seek other employment opportunities.
Over the past decade, researchers (e.g., Buckley et al., 2002) have documented the utility of an expectation-lowering procedure (ELP) as a generalized realistic recruitment tool that is intended to reduce inflated and unrealistic expectations of job recruits. Proponents of the ELP assert that it addresses some of the limitations of an RJP, such as the differential effects of negative versus positive message framing (Buda & Charnov, 2003; Highhouse et al., 2004; Reeve et al., 2006) described above. Although the content of an ELP is intended to generate the same outcomes from job applicants as an RJP, it does so using more direct and general information (Morse & Popovich, 2009). In contrast to the specific information on working conditions, supervision, coworker relationships, and so on provided by an RJP, an ELP excludes organization- and job-specific details and instead concentrates on helping applicants understand the realities that arise for new entrants to an organization. This concentration is an attractive feature since research indicates that most newly hired employees tend to have unrealistically optimistic expectations about work arrangements (Wanous, 1992). The ELP is conducted in a fashion that avoids specifically denigrating the organization but instead focuses on providing an appropriate calibration of preemployment expectations. A field experiment by Buckley and colleagues in which RJP, ELP, and a combination of the two were compared suggested that use of a non–job-specific ELP in combination with an RJP may produce greater benefits than the application of either tool alone. Thus, given the limitations of the realistic recruitment procedure obtained by this and prior studies (Morse & Popovich, 2009), future research that explores the relative advantages of using the ELP as an alternative or complement to the RJP is merited.
Personality and Organizational Culture Preferences
At the outset of this article we noted that, despite several differences in design and focus, our study constitutes an extension of Judge and Cable’s (1997) research given our common focus on the relationships between the FFM and organizational culture preferences. Table 5 provides a comparison of Judge and Cable’s hypotheses and findings with those of the current study. Note that we grouped the team-oriented and supportive cultural dimensions under the clan culture and the aggressive, outcome-oriented, rewards-oriented, and decisive cultural dimensions under the market culture because these dimensions of the OCP appear to be subsumed by the corresponding cultural types as described by Quinn and Cameron (2011).
Comparison of Hypotheses and Findings of the Judge and Cable (1997) and Current Studies a .
Note: H+ = hypothesized positive relationship; H− = hypothesized negative relationship; boldface = supported hypothesis; superscript s = self-report; superscript p = peer-report; signs in parentheses reflect relationships in the opposite direction from that hypothesized.
Dependent variable in Judge and Cable’s (1997) organizational attraction; dependent variable in the current study is subjective P-O fit.
Findings for the clan culture
Our results regarding perceived P-O fit with the clan culture provided support for our predictions that they would be positively related to extraversion (Hypothesis 2) and agreeableness (Hypothesis 3). Judge and Cable (1997) similarly obtained support for their predictions that job seekers who were more extraverted and agreeable would be more attracted to team-oriented cultures. However, they obtained more nuanced findings for supportive cultures. As expected, agreeableness was positively related to attraction to supportive cultures, whereas extraversion was negatively related (but only for self-ratings of personality). These findings suggest that although the team-oriented aspects of clan cultures appeal to extraverts, they do not value the supportive features (e.g., sensitivity, tact). Hence, future researchers examining how personality relates to organizational culture using the CVM may find it necessary to examine specific dimensions of culture and specific facets of extraversion (Kausel & Slaughter, 2011; Lucas et al., 2000) to generate more precise insights regarding these relationships.
Although an unexpected negative relationship between preferences for team-oriented cultures and conscientiousness emerged in the Judge and Cable (1997) study, no relationship between conscientiousness and perceived fit with the clan culture was found in the current study. In addition, neither study found support for their prediction that more open job seekers would be less favorably predisposed to team-oriented cultures. Finally, we obtained an unexpected positive relationship between neuroticism and perceived fit with the clan culture. Perhaps more neurotic persons find the clan to be more tolerant and “accepting” of their emotional outbursts and general moodiness. Consistent with this speculation, neuroticism has been shown to be positively related to community work values (Berings et al., 2004). Together, the two studies indicate that extraversion and agreeableness are the strongest and most consistent predictors of preferences for and perceived fit with the clan and team-oriented/supportive cultures. In addition, we found evidence that suggests more neurotic recruits will also perceive a good fit with the clan culture, although more research is needed to assess the veracity of this finding.
Findings for the hierarchy culture
Both the current and Judge and Cable’s (1997) studies provided evidence of the predicted relationships between conscientiousness and preferences for the hierarchy (Hypothesis 5) and detail-oriented cultures, respectively. Thus, conscientious persons appear to respond favorably to the structure and precision of the hierarchy culture. However, in contrast to Judge and Cable’s unexpected finding that openness was positively related to preferences for detail-oriented cultures, we found that, as expected (Hypothesis 9), more versus less open persons were less likely to report a fit with the hierarchy. Although the direction of this finding differs from that of Judge and Cable, recall that they likewise predicted a negative relationship between detail-oriented cultural preferences and openness. Hence, we believe our findings are more intuitively appealing and reflective of the openness to experience construct. Apparently, more open recruits find the routine and structure of the hierarchy to be incompatible with their quest for creativity and novelty. However, our prediction that more neurotic recruits would perceive a greater fit with the hierarchy culture (Hypothesis 6) was not supported. Thus, there is no evidence that less emotionally stable persons favor the structure and routine of the hierarchy culture.
Findings for the market culture
We posited that because less agreeable persons tend to be more competitive and comfortable with conflict (McCrae & Costa, 1997, 2008), they would perceive a greater fit with the market culture (Hypothesis 4). The significant negative relationship between agreeableness and perceived fit with the market culture provides support for this assertion. These results are also consistent with those of Judge and Cable (1997), who found that agreeableness was negatively related to preferences for aggressive, outcome-oriented, and decisive cultures, as expected. An unexpected negative relationship between agreeableness and rewards-oriented values also emerged in their study that is likewise consistent with Hypothesis 4, given that market cultures place a strong emphasis on contingent rewards. Although no relationship between extraversion and market preferences were posited or found in our study, Judge and Cable found support for their hypothesis that extraverts would prefer aggressive cultures, as well as an unexpected finding that they favor outcome-oriented cultures. Finally, although we did not posit or find evidence that conscientious persons favor the market culture, Judge and Cable obtained mixed support for such a relationship. Specifically, they found that conscientiousness was positively associated with outcome-oriented values, as expected, but the predicted relationship between conscientiousness with rewards-oriented values did not emerge. In addition, an unexpected negative relationship between openness aggressive values emerged.
Overall, these findings indicate that less agreeable persons (who welcome competition and conflict) in general perceive a greater fit with the market culture. Moreover, they favor the aggressive, outcome-oriented, rewards-oriented, and decisive values found in such cultures, in particular, to a larger degree than people who were more agreeable (who place a premium on cooperation). There is also evidence that the more specific cultural dimensions delineated by the OCP are useful in teasing out personality-related preferences for specific aspects of the market culture.
Findings for the adhocracy culture
We obtained support for the posited relationship between openness and perceived fit with the adhocracy culture (Hypothesis 8). Obviously, the value placed on creativity and innovation by the adhocracy culture is shared by persons who are especially open to experience (Costa & McRae, 1988; McCrae & Costa, 2008), which elevates the level of P-O fit that they perceive with this culture. Judge and Cable (1997) obtained similar results, with openness being positively related to job seekers’ preferences for innovative organizational cultures. Contrary to expectations, we were unable to replicate the posited negative relationship between neuroticism and fit with the adhocracy (innovative) culture (Hypothesis 7) obtained by Judge and Cable. In addition, although they posited and found that more as opposed to less conscientious job seekers are less attracted to innovative cultures, we neither posited nor found evidence of a negative relationship for fit with the adhocracy. More research is needed to clarify these inconsistent findings.
The findings summarized above complement prior research that documents relationships between the FFM and performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Barrick et al., 2001) by providing insight into the organizational cultures within which such personality types are most likely to thrive. Given that P-O fit is related to several key work outcomes beyond performance, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors, and turnover (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Verquer et al., 2003), the practical utility of our findings is readily apparent. While the importance of conscientiousness across performance contexts, of extraversion to social tasks, and of openness to creative endeavors, is well documented (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Barrick et al., 2001), our findings reveal that these traits are associated with perceived fit with the hierarchy, clan, and adhocracy cultures, respectively. Hence, such identified matches between personality and organizational cultures suggest that these are settings where persons with these traits can achieve both high levels of performance and well-being.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
As is the case for any study, there are limitations to our research that are important to recognize. Because the only source of data was college students and the only data collection method involved online self-report measures, it is possible that mono-method and mono-source biases distorted the results. However, we purposefully collected the independent and dependent variables at different points in time as recommended by Podsakoff and colleagues (2003) to reduce the potential effects of such biases. Moreover, the fact that the FFM scales generally correlated significantly with P-O fit ratings for the predicted culture and not with those of other cultures suggests that there were no systematic effects of common source and method bias. Thus, although there is a possibility that some of the relationships identified are attributable to common method/source variance, and therefore spurious, the pattern of our results suggests otherwise. Nonetheless, future studies that utilize multiple sources of data collection are warranted.
A second limitation arises from the exclusive use of undergraduate college students as participants. Nonetheless, given that respondents in this study are also potential recruits and, in some cases, active job seekers, concerns about external validity that might limit the generalizability of the findings appear to be less serious within the context of this research. Moreover, the fact that the control variable, full-time work experience, did not emerge as a predictor of P-O fit in any of the analyses lessens external validity concerns arising from the limited work experience among the respondents. Nonetheless, future studies that include participants with more diverse and extensive work experience could help to clarify the extent to which it moderates the effects of personality on P-O fit.
A third limitation arises from our exclusive use of the internet as a platform for communicating information about the qualities of the four cultural types and the organization’s recruitment strategy. Despite the growing use of web-based recruitment (Dineen & Soltis, 2010), much of the recruiting process is still conducted using alternative communication media, including radio, television, and print advertising, telephone correspondence, and face-to-face meetings (Breaugh, 2008). Hence, additional research is necessary to ascertain the extent to which our findings regarding the relationships between personality and organizational culture preferences generalize to recruitment settings where alternative media are employed.
Although our results identified relationships between personality and subjective P-O fit, the extent to which the FFM is related to objective P-O fit and associated positive outcomes (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Verquer et al., 2003) remains an open question. Thus, our results could be extended in future studies to determine the degree to which the FFM predicts both objective and subjective P-O fit after recruits have entered the organization (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; O’Reilly et al., 1991), as well as anticipated gains in employee job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and retention (Kristof-Brown & Jansen, 2007). To explore these relationships, longitudinal studies are needed that collect (a) selected personality measures from a cohort of job applicants, (b) the applicants’ perceptions of P-O fit with a set of recruiting organizations with diverse cultures, and (c) subsequent measures of P-O fit, work attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intentions), and actual work outcomes (e.g., job performance, turnover) across multiple time intervals. Although the logistical and resource obstacles to conducting a longitudinal study are substantial, sufficient precedent exists in the literature on P-O fit (Carless, 2005) to illustrate that they are possible.
Further insight into the relationships between applicant personality and the appeal of organizational cultures may be secured by adopting other measures of personality and cultural preferences. Given the strong conceptual and empirical foundations for the CVM (Cameron & Quinn, 2011; Meyer et al., 2010; Quinn & Spreitzer, 1991; van Vuuren et al., 2007) and the FFM (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Barrick et al., 2003; Barrick et al., 2001; Costa & McRae, 1988; McCrae & Costa, 1997, 2008), we felt these frameworks provided firm foundations for our hypotheses. However, partial replications of this study that employ (a)different personality frameworks, (b) the more specific facet scales of the NEO-PI-R (Kausel & Slaughter, 2011), and/or (c) alternative organizational culture/personality taxonomies (Detert et al., 2000) may likewise reveal more fine-grained relationships than those examined in this study.
Practical Implications
The FFM provided insight into the personalities of potential recruits who favored particular organizational cultures. These findings suggest another approach to securing personnel who fit the organization’s culture that may be preferred if cultural change is deemed to be undesirable or not feasible. A concerted effort could be made to identify and communicate with recruits who are most likely to perceive a good fit with the organization’s existing culture. For example, if an organization’s dominant culture most closely resembles a hierarchy, our findings suggest that people who are highly conscientious, but are less open, will tend to find this culture especially appealing. If the dominant culture more closely resembles an adhocracy, persons who are very open to new experiences are most likely to report a high level of fit with the organization. Finally, highly agreeable persons are more likely to favor the clan culture.
Although concerns about the susceptibility of personality measures that are used for selection purposes to faking have been raised (see Goffin & Boyd, 2009, for a review), recent studies indicate that “faking on personality measures is not a significant problem in real-world selection settings “ (Hogan, Barrett, & Hogan, 2007, p. 1270). Hence, organizations may find it beneficial to use relevant personality measures such as the NEO-PI-R as tools for identifying recruits who are particularly likely to perceive a fit with the dominant organizational culture. Alternatively, organizations may find it useful to present recruits with descriptions of particular cultural types, such as the four described by the CVM (Cameron & Quinn, 2011), to ask them which profiles they prefer and then to assess the extent to which the favored profiles match the organization’s to determine the likelihood of a high level of P-O fit being achieved.
Our findings also have implications for web-based recruiting. As more organizations adopt the internet as a primary platform for employee recruitment, decreased transaction costs (in time and effort) permit individuals to apply online to multiple jobs within a short time period with relative ease. As a consequence, these “decreased application costs have lowered attraction thresholds, creating a ‘dark side of Web recruitment’ whereby too many job seekers are attracted to and apply for a particular job vacancy” (Dineen et al., 2007, p. 356). The research of Dineen and associates (Dineen et al., 2007; Dineen & Noe, 2009) on fit information customization suggests that the collection of voluntary self-report measures of personality may enable organizations to provide potential recruits with customized information on objective P-O fit. Essentially, information fit customization provides recruits with an RJP that serves to encourage poor-fitting job seekers to select out of the applicant pool, thereby potentially enhancing the effectiveness of recruitment and selection processes. Our findings suggest that efforts to collect personality data (such as FFM traits) from job seekers that can be subsequently applied to generate customized information on their likely fit with the organizational culture represents an intriguing application for organizations seeking to improve the P-O fit of new hires and their subsequent retention. In our opinion, this area is promising for future research.
Another application of cultural preference and personality data would be to use the internet to identify opportunities where new recruits might achieve the best fit in an organization’s existing culture. For example, if an organization’s culture includes a balance of elements from each cultural type, the NEO-PI-R could be used as a tool to assign new entrants to units that best fit their personality and cultural preferences. Given potential benefits arising from improved P-O fit (Dineen & Soltis, 2010; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005), the adoption of such innovative approaches to enhancing P-O fit merit further consideration. In summary, if people make the place, as Schneider (1987, 2008) has convincingly argued and demonstrated, our results suggest the FFM may help them to find a place where they fit well and thrive.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
An earlier version of this manuscript was presented at the 2005 Southern Management Association (SMA) Meeting in Charleston, SC. We acknowledge the SMA anonymous reviewers, the three MCQ anonymous reviewers, and Editor James Barker for their constructive feedback and guidance in the development of this manuscript.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the Office of Naval Research: Award Number N00014-00-1-0669.