Submission Number: 10014
Title: Person-Environment Fit Research Incubator
Primary Sponsor: Organization Behavior Division
Other Potential Sponsors: Human Resource Management, Research Methods
Abstract
Researchers have invoked the Person-Environment (P-E) Fit paradigm to investigate a variety of
organizational phenomena. The P-E Fit Research Incubator will provide a forum through which
people who share an interest in P-E Fit research can share ideas, solicit feedback from leading
experts in the domain, and develop research project ideas that have the potential for publication
in leading management journals. Participants will come to the session with general interests and
raw project ideas and, ideally, leave the session as members of a project team that is armed with
a well-defined set of research questions and a methodology for addressing those questions.
Overview of the Workshop
Background: The concept of Person-Environment (P-E) Fit embodies the notion that the
relationship between features of the person and of the environment influence individual level
outcomes (Pervin, 1989; Schneider, 1987). Research falling within the P-E Fit paradigm explores
fit between person characteristics and characteristics of the vocation, job, organization, and
group (Jansen & Kristof-Brown, 2006) and the paradigm has been used to examine a variety of
organizational behavior and human resource management phenomena including career choice,
selection, organizational socialization, work attitudes, and occupational stress, among many
others (Cable & Edwards, 2004; Kristof, 1996). It is fair to say that use of the P-E Fit paradigm
is widespread and growing and that it plays a central role in a variety of substantive research
domains. Of relevance to this proposal, we see a unique opportunity to bring together scholars
whose substantive research interests differ, but who share an interest in the P-E Fit paradigm.
Objectives: The P-E Fit Research Incubator is designed to bring together individuals who are
doing/interested in doing research that falls within the P-E Fit paradigm. During a four hour
session, participants will work closely with a group of ten to twelve facilitators, scholars who
have developed a successful publishing track-record within the P-E Fit domain. Participants and
facilitators will share their interests in P-E Fit research, explore how their individual interests fit
with each others’ and with the major issues and trends in the domain, narrow their focus to
specific research questions and hypotheses, and organize into small working groups that will
pursue a specific research project that has the potential to produce publications in top-flight
management journals.
Why the workshop should be of interest to the Organization Behavior Committee: The P-E
Fit Research Incubator is well suited to fulfilling the Organization Behavior Division’s goal of
“Making Connections” because it will bring together people who are interested in a variety of
substantive research domains and who otherwise might not have an opportunity to connect. In
addition, the PDW will provide a forum through which participants who have little to no
experience with the paradigm can connect with established P-E Fit researchers to co-develop
promising research projects. It is also likely that other divisions in which the P-E Fit paradigm
plays a vital role would be willing to co-sponsor this PDW (e.g., Human Resource Management,
Research Methods).
Cable, D., & Edwards, J. (2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and
empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 822-834.
Jansen, K., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2006). Toward a multidimensional theory of personenvironment fit. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18, 193-212.
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations,
measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1-49.
Pervin, L. (1989). Persons, situations, and interactions: The history of a controversy and a
discussion of theoretical models. Academy of Management Review, 14, 350-360.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437-453.
Description of the Workshop’s Format
Activities to be completed in advance of the PDW: Prior to the 2008 Academy of Management
Meeting (1) the organizer will recruit facilitators, (2) the organizer and facilitators will recruit
participants, and (3) the participants will provide information regarding their interests in P-E Fit
research and the specific issues that they would like to discuss during the PDW.
1. Recruit Facilitators: As of October, 2007, the following people have agreed to participate as
facilitators.
Talya Bauer, Portland State University
Jon Billsberry, Open University
Brian Dineen, University of Kentucky
Berrin Erdogan, Portland State University
Jeff Edwards, University of North Carolina
Karen Jansen, University of Virginia
Lisa Lambert, Georgia State University
Abbie Shipp, Texas A&M
Dan Turban, University of Missouri
Annelies van Vianen, University of Amsterdam
2. Recruit Participants: During early Spring 2008, the session organizer and facilitators will
recruit up to 50 participants using relevant list-serves and electronic newsletters.
3. Survey and Cluster Participants: In late Spring, 2008, those who have signed on as
participants will be asked to describe their general research interests, specific interests in P-E Fit
research, and research ideas they’d like to discuss during the PDW. The session organizer will
create clusters of 5 or 6 participants based on their interests. These clusters will serve as the
departure point during Phase 1 of the PDW (see the program structure described below).
Structure of the PDW: The PDW will consist of the following five phases.
Phase 1: (30 minutes)
a. General Welcome, Facilitators and Participants introduce themselves.
b. Session organizer provides an overview of the process (previewing the schedule of activities,
outlining the roles the facilitators will play).
c. Participants break into clusters of 5 or 6, categorized based on their initially expressed
interests prior to attending the PDW.
Phase 2: (60 minutes)
a. Cluster members take a few minutes to say more about their own research interests and ideas.
The cluster brainstorms about current trends in their area, problems that need to be solved, and
ideas they have about addressing those research agendas. Those who are mis-grouped should be
able to tell and should feel free to migrate to other clusters.
b. Clusters narrow their ideas into a focused list of top four problems that need to be solved or
top four research questions the area faces.
Break (15 minutes)
Phase 3: (60 minutes)
a. Clusters present their specific research questions/hypotheses to the larger group, which asks
questions and provides feedback; session organizer records these ideas on flip-charts.
b. Facilitators and participants indicate which ideas they’re most interested in working on. Small
teams of 2 or 3 will be formed based on participants’ top choices. Where more than 4 individuals
wish to pursue the same idea, session organizer and facilitators will encourage the formation of
another team. Those teams may elect to take very different angles on the problem however, they
may decide later to get back together to form one larger group.
Break (15 minutes)
Phase 4: (60 minutes)
a. Working groups discuss the specifics of carrying out a research project that can tackle the
research question the group has signed on to (e.g., possible methods, operationalization of key
variables, data collection opportunities, time frames, etc…).
b. Facilitators have the option of joining a specific project, but they do not have to. Facilitators
who have not signed on to a specific project roam from group to group, providing feedback,
procedural guidance, editorial suggestions, or any other help that can serve to keep the process
moving forward.
Phase 5: (beyond the session and the AOM meeting)
Working groups continue their discussion and, ideally, execute their research project. The
session organizer will follow-up with representatives from each working group to evaluate
whether the session produced tangible outcomes (e.g., conference papers, submissions to
journals, refereed publications).
Statement from the Session Organizer
“I have received signed statements from all intended participants agreeing to participate for the
entire workshop and, AND that these participants are not in violation of the Rule of Three + Three.”
Bennett J. Tepper