Suchergebnisse

Person–environment fit has been found to have significant implications for employee attitudes and behaviors. Most research to date has approached person–environment fit as a static phenomenon, and without examining how different types of person–environment fit may affect each other. In particular, little is known about the conditions under which fit with one aspect of the environment influences another aspect, as well as subsequent behavior. To address this gap we examine the role of leader–member exchange in the relationship between two types of person–environment fit over time: person–organization and person–job fit, and subsequent turnover. Using data from two waves (T1 and T2, respectively) and turnover data collected two years later (T3) from a sample of 160 employees working in an elderly care organization in the Netherlands, we find that person–organization fit at T1 is positively associated with person–job fit at T2, but only for employees in high-quality leader–member exchange relationships. Higher needs–supplies fit at T2 is associated with lower turnover at T3. In contrast, among employees in high-quality leader–member exchange relationships, the demands–abilities dimension of person–job fit at T2 is associated with higher turnover at T3.

PurposePrior research has yielded mixed results regarding the relationship between performance and turnover intentions. Drawing from social exchange theory, the purpose of this paper is to propose that the performance‐turnover intentions association may be contingent upon individuals' exchange relationships with their supervisor and co‐workers.Design/methodology/approachSurveys were conducted in six branches of an elderly care organization. All 512 employees received a questionnaire, and responses were obtained from 225 employees.FindingsSelf‐rated performance and manager‐rated performance were both negatively related to turnover intentions. The relationship between manager‐rated performance and turnover intentions was stronger under conditions of high leader‐member exchange, whereas the relationship between self‐rated performance and turnover intentions was weaker under conditions of high task interdependence.Research limitations/implicationsHigh performers may be particularly sensitive to relationships with their supervisor, and low performers seem to be more sensitive to relationships with colleagues. Performance data obtained from different sources (self/manager ratings) may show different patterns of results. The value of these findings in extending notions from social exchange theory to the realm of talent engagement is discussed.Practical implicationsTo retain high performers, firms should promote high‐quality relationships between leaders and subordinates.Social implicationsThe study suggests that investing in social relationships in the health care sector may be worthwhile. In particular, women represent an increasingly important share in this sector, and social mechanisms may help retain high‐performing women.Originality/valueThe study addresses the inconsistent findings of prior research regarding the performance‐turnover relationship, and the lack of agreement on variables that may relate to the retention of valuable employees.

Purpose– In examining whether social exchange or social identity mechanisms drive the relationship between ethical leadership and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB), the purpose of this paper is to argue that the mechanism linking ethical leadership and UPB varies for different levels of job autonomy.Design/methodology/approach– Data were requested from 225 employees in several Dutch organizations, of which 156 questionnaires were returned. The authors used multilevel path analysis in MPlus to test the hypotheses, which allows for simultaneous estimation of different regression equations and for testing the significance of indirect effects.Findings– In line with the hypotheses, results revealed a direct relationship between ethical leadership and UPB when followers have little job autonomy. For followers high on job autonomy, the authors found that ethical leadership relates to UPB via organizational identification.Practical implications– It is advised to use ethical leadership with care when it focusses on reciprocity and identification. The results suggest that followers may be inclined to justify their unethical actions by appealing to the principle of higher loyalty – believing they are just doing what the organization wants them to do.Originality/value– Previous research has used social learning theory to show that ethical leadership is likely to stimulate and transfer ethical norms and behaviors. The current study however demonstrates the reciprocal and dark side of ethical leadership, as the authors found that ethical leadership can encourage UPB for followers with low job autonomy.