Master’s Thesis
A Study Investigating the Relationship Between Person-Organization Fit and Intent to Use Flexible Workplace Arrangements
Caitlyn DeClement University of Amsterdam
Student ID: 12003379
Graduate School of Communication Science: Corporate Communication Thesis Supervisor: Claartje ter Hoeven
Abstract
Prior research investigating employee intent to utilize flexible working arrangements has mainly focused on macro-level predictors, largely ignoring individual level components which has created a gap in empirical research in this field. This study seeks to fill this gap by focusing on a micro-level element of an employee’s workplace perception by investigating the relationship of Person to Organization (P-O) Fit with intent to utilize FWA’s. The results of this research signify a positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s, with the underlying
mechanisms of self-expression in the workplace as well as perceived support from management indicating that both have a significant partial mediation effect. Managerial implications of these findings and avenues for future research are then discussed.
Keywords
Person to Organization Fit, Flexible Workplace Arrangements, Self-Expression, Perceived Management Support
Introduction
Flexible workplace arrangements (FWA’s) have seen an emerging increase in availability and use at most organizations (Demerouti, Derks, Brummelhuis, & Bakker, 2014). FWA’s are “generally defined as work options that permit flexibility in terms of ‘where’ work is completed and/or ‘when’ work is completed”, and these arrangements are intended to attract, motivate, and retain talent (Hill et al., 2008). FWA’s have been shown to give benefits to employees who actively use them, for example, Grzywacz, Carlson & Shulkin (2008) found that FWA’s can help reduce work-related stress and burnout, however, it should be noted that findings in this area are mixed (Menezes & Kelliher, 2011). Moreover, some studies have indicated that FWA’s can decrease commuting and work stress, which in turn can enhance their work performance and efforts (Raghuram & Wiesenfeld, 2004; Hyman & Summers, 2004), which then result in added advantages for the employer. Additionally, flexible workplace arrangements in some studies have been shown to give a competitive advantage to organizations who offer them, since these arrangements have the benefit of attracting and retaining high quality employees, some of whom may not have been considered for employment in the past due to their personal circumstances that limit when and where they can work (Poelmans, Chinchilla & Cardona, 2003). Furthermore, the most recent generation of workers tend to view work in flexible terms (specifically where and when work is done); and they have a strong desire to utilize flexible work schedules to accommodate their need for work-life balance (Myers & Sadagjiana, 2010) and research has shown that employees find comfort and flourish within organizations that support their preferences (Bretz & Judge, 1992).
Considering FWA’s potential value and importance to employees and employers alike, it is troubling that research has found that employees can feel uncomfortable or hesitant asking to
utilize FWA’s in their organization if they are unsure how the request will be considered (Kelly & Kaley, 2006). A potential factor, which to date no study has utilized in discerning which employees will feel able to take advantage of their organization’s FWA’s, is the level of
congruence and compatibility of values between an employee and their organization, referred to as Person to Organization Fit (P-O Fit) (Cable & Judge, 1996). Research has consistently shown a good ‘fit’ leads to positive outcomes for both person and organization (Kristof, 1996; O'Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991). A study conducted by Brown and Leigh (1996) showed that employees that “perceive their organizational environment positively (i.e., as consistent with their own values and self-interests)” feel psychologically safe, meaning that they perceive management to be supportive, and are at ease expressing themselves in the workplace. Self-expression in a work context involves the extent to which employees feel comfortable expressing their self-concepts and preferences at their company (Hassan, Akram, & Naz, 2012). Supportive management includes how much employees perceive their manager to be supportive of their methods for completing work (Hassan, Akram, & Naz, 2012).
There has been a call to action for empirical research to investigate individual level elements that can provide insight into which employees are utilizing FWA’s (Greenberg & Landry, 2011). Therefore, a contribution to the current literature will be done by looking into the relationship between P-O fit and an employee’s intent to utilize flexible workplace arrangements, mediated by ability to self-express and the perception of supportive management.
RQ: Does an employee’s Person to Organization fit relate to that employee’s intent to utilize flexible workplace arrangements at their organization, and is this relationship mediated
Theoretical Framework Person to Organization Fit
Following past research, this study uses the most prevalent operationalization of P-O fit in the literature, which is congruence and compatibility between an employee and the
organization in regard to shared values (Bretz & Judge, 1992). Although other studies have evaluated P-O fit between the person and organization by examining resources, culture, and skills (Bright 2007), this study will be looking specifically at values. This is due to the fact that values are “conceived as fundamental and relatively enduring, representing conscious desires held by the person and encompass preferences, interests, motives, and goals” (Tugal & Kilic, 2015). The degree to which an individual’s values align with the organization’s will be indicative of the individual’s “fit” with the organization (Lopez, 1999). P-O research is grounded in
Schneider’s (1987) Attraction-Selection-Attrition (ASA) framework, which posits that
individuals are not just randomly assigned to situations, but instead gravitate towards and choose situations that they find attractive. As Sekiguchi (2004) sums up, “organizations are one situation that people are attracted to, selected to be a part of, and remain with if they are a good fit with the organization, or leave if they are not a good fit with the organization.” An employee will prefer and feel comfortable at an organization where their personal characteristics are aligned with the organization’s own specific attributes (Cable & Judge, 1994). This comfortability which P-O fit can allow for could theoretically be associated with which employees will feel able to ask to utilize FWA’s. Especially since studies have demonstrated that employees can feel
uncomfortable or hesitant asking to utilize FWA’s in their organization if they are unsure how the request will be considered (even if formally allowed) and are usually implemented through
employee-manager negotiations, with managers being given discretion on who can use these policies (Kirby & Krone, 2002).
Kelly and Kaley (2006), in their research on flexible workplace policy implementation in U.S. companies, suggested that the way flexible workplace policies are designed is a key
determinant in intention to use these policies by employees. They found that companies who arrange these policies to be seen as the “employee’s right” rather than up to “managerial discretion” help employees overcome the many constraints and tensions that limit utilization of these policies. Additionally, it was found that managers are vital in allowing employees to turn the formal policy into actual practice (Dick & Hyde, 2006). These findings are often mentioned in the literature and studies looking into employee’s intent to utilize FWA’s focus mainly on managerial decision making and levels of support in the organization for flexible working in general (Wise & Bond, 2003), which are macro level factors. This study fills a gap in the literature by suggesting that individual employee’s perceived P-O fit will be related to their intent to utilize FWA’s, a micro level approach. Since existing formal flexibility arrangements offered by an organization has proven to be an insufficient indicator of actual flexibility available to the employee, this study will be looking at the extent to which an employee feel’s free to ask to use these arrangements (Eaton, 2003). Thus, this research will propose that an employee’s P-O fit will be positively associated with their intent to utilize flexible working arrangements.
Hypothesis 1: An employee’s P-O fit is positively related to their intent to utilize FWA’s.
Self-Expression
Self-expression as defined in a work context is when an employee feels safe communicating their personalities, creativity, feelings, and self-concepts in their work
environment (Brown & Leigh, 1996). Since an organization’s corporate culture is socially constructed by the employees who work there (Ogbor, 2001), an important aspect of P-O fit entails “congruence between employees” (in terms of values, demographics, or experiences) and that this can “affect job attitudes due to stronger interpersonal relationships”, as well as healthier communication with co-workers and superiors (Cable & Judge, 1996). Individuals with “similar attributes and experiences benefit from improved communication and liking, which in turn affect job attitudes and organizational outcomes” (Cable & Judge, 1996). This similarity for the
employee leads to a psychologically safe environment, which allows for their ability to self-express openly (Hassan, Akram, & Naz, 2012), and to not fear organizational sanctions for completing work in their own manner (Brown & Leigh, 1996), which includes where and when work is accomplished.
Experiencing ease self-expressing at work can be an underlying mechanism that reduces the discomfort some employee’s feel asking to utilize FWA’s (Kelly & Kaley, 2006).
Particularly since research has shown that co-worker discourse has an impact on the structuration of work-family policies, which is a form of FWA’s, and influences employee’s intent to utilize these benefits (Kirby & Krone, 2002). Co-workers have been shown in some organizations to “police” use of the policies, and determine for themselves if the policies are being “used” or “abused” by fellow employees, which has a negative impact on utilization of these benefits (Kirby & Krone, 2002). This “policing” of policy usage is an example of concertive control, which is exerted from fellow co-workers rather than managers, where “workers will develop a powerful sense of functional self-control from their own values, norms, and rules for doing good work on the team” (Barker, 1993). When concertive control is active in a work setting,
work, monitoring themselves, and dispensing rewards and punishments among each other” (Larson & Thompkins, 2005). However, if an employee feels their co-workers and their organization have similar characteristics and values, this will lead to a psychologically safe environment allowing for open communication, which should theoretically alleviate the uncertainty of asking to utilize FWA’s. The below hypothesis is then formulated:
Hypothesis 2: Comfortability self-expressing at work by employees will mediate the
positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s.
Perception of Management Support
Perceived support from management can be defined as the extent to which the employee believes their supervisor gives them control over their work and the methods they use to
accomplish it (Brown & Leigh, 1996). This study is looking specifically at the employee’s perception of the support they receive, rather than the actual environment in itself, because individual valuations are what create attitudinal and behavioral responses (James and Jones, 1974). It has been proven that employees who are similar to other organizational members appear to enjoy important benefits more than less similar individuals, who are less likely to receive them (Cable & Judge, 1996), and this attitudinal similarity is associated with the perceived support an employee experiences from their supervisor (Cable & Judge, 1996). Moreover, manager support is a key indicator in an employee’s decision to ask to utilize FWA’s (Thompson, Beauvais & Lyness, 1999). Utilization of FWA’s is usually determined on a case-by-case basis, with managers being given discretion (Friedman & Johnson, 1997). Research has shown that supervisors apply these policies inconsistently and, that some employees do not feel
they are free to use these arrangements provided by the organization and that they fear reprisal (Eaton & Bailyn, 2000).
Since managers are given discretion on who can use these policies and utilization of the benefits involves a negotiation between the manager and employee (Kelly & Kaley, 2006), manager support is essential. Kirby (2000), in her study on work-family programs, found that even though flexibility arrangements were technically available to employees, certain managers do not actually want their subordinates to use them, which sends mixed-messages, creating inconsistent communication and creates uncertainty in employees regarding FWA’s actual usage. Moreover, her study also found that supervisors try not to set a precedent for FWA utilization and create an atmosphere of “fair if not always consistent”, which further adds to employee’s uncertainty as to their availability (Kirby, 2000). This finding is in line with related research in the field, which has shown that the mere availability of FWA’s at the organization does not equal to employees feeling able to use the benefits, and there is a “provision-utilization” gap that exists in many organizations (Hall & Atkinson, 2006). Studies have shown that employees are
sometimes not informed consistently of the arrangements available to them at their company, or are pressured by management not to use them (Kirby & Krone, 2002). It follows then that perceptions of management supportiveness are linked to lower levels of psychological strain, logically enabling employees to feel more comfortable asking to utilize FWA’s if they would like to (O'Driscoll et al., 2003). Managers who are considered supportive “allow their
subordinates to control their own work activities and methods for accomplishing their tasks without fear of punishment” (Brown & Leigh 1996), thus the below hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 3: Perception of supportive management by employees will mediate the
Methodology Design
The research question was analyzed using an individually answered online survey
powered by Qualtrics. Respondents were required to give their informed consent prior to starting the survey, and were cognizant of the confidentiality of their responses. This study has a
professional focus, so the questionnaire was posted on the researcher’s LinkedIn profile, as well as Facebook, with the added request for respondents to share the survey to their own social media networks, in order to gather a larger sample. The questionnaire was also sent out to acquaintances of the researcher who fit the requirements for this study.
The survey itself asked basic demographic questions (age, sex, education level) which will be the control variables for this study. The survey was designed with four questions at the beginning which excluded any respondents that work at organizations that do not offer flexible workplace arrangements (or who are not sure of their existence), who do not work full time (35+ hours a week), that have worked at their organization less than six months, and any respondent who is their own boss or the head of the organization and does not report to management. To reiterate, FWA’s will be defined here as any full-time employment situation that allows the employee to complete work outside of the office, and outside of the company’s normal operating hours. The stipulation involving amount of time belonging to the organization is important, as employees who have worked at a company less than six months might still not know the extent to which they feel they fit with the organization. Eligible respondents were then given statements relating to P-O fit, self-expression in the workplace, perceived management support, and intent to utilize FWA’s and were asked to rate their agreement/disagreement on a 5-point Likert scale for each item.
Sample
Participants of this survey were recruited using a non-probability convenience sampling methodology. The total number of respondents who began the survey was 230, however, eight respondents were excluded due to non-completion. Additionally, 80 respondents who began the survey did not meet one of the four conditions for this sample, and were directed out of the questionnaire at the start. Therefore, the total sample size consisted of 140 participants, with the average age being 34 years (SD = 9.39), with a range from 21 to 60. The sample was 55.7% female and 44.3% male. The educational level for this sample was quite high, with 81 (57.9%) respondents having at least a Bachelor degree, and 43 (30.7%) respondents having at least a Graduate degree. The geographic domain of this research was the United States.
Measures
Factor analyses were performed on all scales used in this study, using principal axis factoring, which confirmed that each scale did in fact form only one factor, thus accurately measuring the latent constructs. These results can be found in Appendix A.
Person to Organization (P-O) fit
To investigate employee’s perceptions of their fit with their current organization, a scale created by Cable and DeRue for their study titled “The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Subjective Fit Perceptions” (Cable & DeRue, 2002) was utilized. The scale consists of three items, “The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization values,” “My personal values match my organization’s values and culture,” and “My organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life.” These items were measured on a five-point Likert scale, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly
agree” with participants being asked to pick a number on the scale that most accurately reflects their sentiment. The reliability of this scale was α=.91
Self-Expression
To measure employee’s comfortability self-expressing in the workplace, a scale taken from a study titled “The Relationship between Person Organization Fit, Person-Job-Fit and Turnover Intention in Banking Sector of Pakistan: The Mediating Role of Psychological
Climate” (Hassan, Akram, & Naz, 2012) was utilized. The scale consists of three items, “There are parts of myself that I do not feel free communicating at work”, “I feel free to be completely myself at work”, and “The feelings that I communicate at work are my true feelings”. These items were measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). One item was phrased negatively in order to avoid acquiescence bias from respondents. This scale item was recoded positively before the reliability test was conducted, resulting in a scale reliability α =.81.
Perceived Support from Management
To examine employee’s perceived support they receive from management, a scale from the study by Hassan, Akram, and Naz (2012) which was mentioned above regarding P-O fit was again utilized. The scale consists of four items, “My manager is supportive of my ideas and ways of getting things done”, “My manager is flexible about how I choose to accomplish my job objectives”, “My manager gives me authority to do my job as I see fit”, and “I can trust my manager to back me up on decisions I make in the field”. These items were also measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The scale has a reliability α =.88.
Intent to Use Flexible Workplace Arrangements (FWA’s)
To measure employee’s intent to use the FWA’s available at their current organization, a modified version of a scale was used which was taken from a study conducted by Hayman (2009) that was designed to measure an employee’s comfortability asking to use flexible workplace arrangements at their organization. The scale consists of three items, “In general, I feel free to ask to utilize the flexible workplace arrangements offered by my current employer”, “Asking to utilize my current employer’s flexible workplace arrangements will in no way jeopardize my future with the company”, and “Overall, I feel at ease asking my manager to use any of the workplace flexibility arrangements offered at my current company”. Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The reliability of this scale was α=.90.
Control Variables
This study included age, gender, and education level as control variables, and these were included in all analyses that were run to test the hypotheses. Age was kept as a continuous level variable, with gender being turned into a dummy variable in order to be included in regression analyses. Education level, a categorical level variable, was turned into a dichotomous dummy variable in order to be included in analyses. The education levels of “Less than a High School Diploma”, “High School Diploma or equivalent”, “Some college but no degree”, and “Associate Degree” were coded as “0” and titled lower educated. “Bachelor Degree”, “Graduate Degree”, and “Doctorate Degree” were coded as “1” and titled higher educated.
Analysis
Correlation analyses were conducted between all research variables and control variables prior to running any analyses to test the hypotheses, to gain early insight into the data. A multiple
regression analysis was used to test H1. To test H2 and H3, regression analyses were performed and the four steps to test mediation by Baron and Kenny (1986) were undertaken using
PROCESS macro Version 3 (Hayes, 2012) model number 4.
Results
The correlation analysis result table can be found below. Employee P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s were positively correlated (r = .48, p < .01). Furthermore, P-O fit was found to be positively correlated to self-expression in the workplace (r = .56, p < .01) and self-expression was also positively correlated with intent to utilize FWA’s (r = .56, p < .01). P-O fit was found to be positively correlated with perceived support from management (r = .45, p < .01), and there was also a positive correlation with perceived support from management and intent to utilize FWA’s (r = .66, p < .01). It should be noted that age, gender, and education did not significantly correlate with any of the research variables in this study, implying their lack of an affect in this research context.
Table 1: Correlation Analysis (N = 140)
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. P-O Fit
2. Self-Expression .56**
3. Perceived MS .45** .55**
4. Intent to use FWA .48** .56** .66**
5. Gender (Female=1) -.04 -.01 -.11 -.16
6. Age -.07 -.03 .06 .11 .04
7. Education (Higher Education – 1) .06 .05 .09 .07 -.14 -.29** **Correlation significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Gender – 0 = Male, 1 = Female
Education – 0 = lower educated, 1 = higher educated Correlation Co-efficient: Pearson
H1: P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s.
Hypothesis 1 stated that an employee’s P-O fit will be positively related to their intent to utilize FWA’s at their organization. To test this, a regression analysis was performed, with age, gender, and education level included as control variables. The results of the regression equation indicated that the model explained 26% of the variance and that the model was significant, F(4,134)=13.09, p < .000. It was found that an employee’s P-O fit significantly related to intent
to utilize FWA’s (B = .51, SE = .078, p < .000). The control variables education and gender had no significant effect, while age did show to have a significant impact (B = .02, SE = .01, p = .024). With these results, Hypothesis 1 is accepted with employee P-O fit being positively related to intent to utilize FWA’s.
Table 1: Results from multiple regression analysis predicting intent to utilize FWA’s
B s.e. P-O fit 0.507** 0.08 Gender -0.272 0.14 Age 0.018* 0.01 Education 0.236 0.254 Constant 1.202 0.51 Adjusted R2 0.26** F 13.008
Notes: Gender (0 = Male, 1 = Female) *p < 0.05. **p < 0.001.
Education – 0 = lower educated, 1 = higher educated
H2: P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s, mediated by self-expression
Hypothesis 2 posited that the positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to
utilize FWA’s would be mediated by self-expression. A regression analysis was performed with age, gender, and education acting as controls, which revealed that these variables have no significant effect in the model. In step one of the mediation process, the regression of P-O fit on intent to utilize FWA’s, ignoring the mediator, was significant, B = .502, SE = .078, p < .000.
Step two showed that the regression of P-O fit on the mediator, self-expression in the workplace, was also significant, B = .588, SE = .074, p < .000. Step three of the mediation process showed that the mediator, self-expression, when controlling for P-O fit, had a significant effect on intent to utilize FWA’s, B = .434, SE = .083, p <.000. Step four of the analysis, however, show that when the mediator of self-expression is controlled for, P-O fit is still significantly related to intent to utilize FWA’s, B = .246, SE = .086, p < .005. The indirect effect was tested using a percentile bootstrap estimation approach with 5,000 samples. These results indicated the indirect coefficient was significant, B = .254, SE = .06, 95% CI = [.1457, .3708]. These results support a partial mediation effect. Thus, H2 is accepted with self-expression partially mediating the positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s.
H3: P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s, mediated by perceived support from management
Hypothesis 3 proposed that the positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to
utilize FWA’s would be mediated by perceived support from management. A regression analysis was performed, with age, gender, and education again acting as controls and having no
significant affect in the model. In step one of the mediation process, the regression of P-O fit on intent to utilize FWA’s, ignoring the mediator, was significant, B = .502, SE = .078, p < .000. Step two showed that the regression of P-O fit on the mediator, perceived support from management, was also significant, B = .398, SE = .069, p < .000. Step three of the mediation process showed that the mediator, when controlling for P-O fit, had a significant effect
association with intent to utilize FWA’s, B = .624, SE = .081, p <.000. Step four of the analysis, however, show that when the mediator of perceived support from management is controlled for, P-O fit is still significantly related to intent to utilize FWA’s, B = .254, SE = .072, p < .000. The
indirect effect was tested using a percentile bootstrap estimation approach with 5,000 samples. These results indicated the indirect coefficient was significant, B = .266, SE = .09, 95% CI = [.1092, .4680]. Therefore, H3 is accepted with perceived support from management partially mediating the positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s.
Discussion
Workplace flexibility, which is an employee being able to choose when and where their work is completed, is increasingly becoming an important topic of interest in academic research. It is generally accepted that the model of the ideal worker that organizations came to expect in past decades, which comprised of work always coming first and no flexibility offered to employees, is a trend that is changing (Greenberg & Landry, 2011). However, research is still finding that even though organizations are offering flexible arrangements more so than at any other time, this does not mean that employees are using these benefits at the same rate
(Greenberg & Landry, 2011). Considering FWA’s importance to employees, this study aimed to explore a new factor that might be related to which employees feel comfortable asking to use these benefits, namely an employee’s P-O fit. Employees have different perceptions of their work environment, and these affect their behaviors and reactions in the workplace (Kiewitz, Hochwarter, Ferris, & Castro, 2002). Seeing as current literature has mainly focused on macro-level variables, such as managerial decision making and macro-levels of support in the organization for flexible working in general (Wise & Bond, 2003), this research took a more individually focused stance. Hypothesis 1, positing the positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s, was significantly supported and accepted, and this outcome could potentially drive future research into investigating individual level criteria that can have an effect on FWA usage or intent. For example, some employees may appreciate the structure that a traditional working
day gives them, in terms of the same employment hours and location, and would prefer this over FWA’s (Allen, Johnson, Kiburz & Shockley, 2013). Furthermore, this result has managerial implications in terms of hiring practices, since studies have found that employee’s report higher satisfaction if there are flexible arrangement policies in place that they perceive to be usable, but don’t necessarily have to be actively using them, a construct called perceived usability (Eaton, 2003). This finding is also supported by a study conducted in 2013 on the importance of work-family support policies, which found that the availability of FWA’s at companies works as a symbolic signal to employees about the corporation’s desire for employees to experience work-life balance (Butts, Casper & Yang, 2013). Hiring managers should consider values congruence between the potential hire and the organization, to ensure that hired employees feel comfortable asking to use the arrangements that the organization offers, which has been proven to reduce turnover intention and increase job satisfaction (Anderson, Coffey & Byerly, 2002). Since “Work attitudes (i.e., evaluative tendencies towards one’s job, including job satisfaction and organization commitment) and intent to turnover are among the criteria most frequently
examined in person-organization fit studies” (Verquer, Beehr & Wagner, 2003), this study was a first step towards evaluating P-O fit in a different context, namely FWA usage. Future research can examine this new-found relationship with a sample from the same organization, creating a case study which can consider industry sector, position within the company hierarchy, and company size for possible interactions to expand on this finding. This would be beneficial, because it helps hone in on the important factors that relate to FWA usage, while controlling for other, larger level variables that could be having an effect as well.
utilize FWA’s would be supported by an underlying mechanism, comfortability self-expressing in the workplace. A significant, partial mediation was found, and this indicates that P-O fit’s positive relationship with intent to utilize FWA’s is partially explained by the mediating variable, but that P-O fit also directly relates to intent to utilize FWA’s on its own. This result
demonstrates that comfortability expressing your own particular way of accomplishing work and feeling able to communicate openly in the workplace plays an important role in an employee’s intent to utilize FWA’s. This finding is in line with previous research, as it has been documented that an employee feeling safe to express oneself can result in greater satisfaction with one’s job (Shalley, Gilson, & Blum, 2000) and greater commitment (Kiewitz, Hochwarter, Ferris, & Castro, 2002), and this is due to the fact freedom of self-expression enables employees “to express core aspects of their self-concept” (Argyris, 1964). Hypothesis 3 stated that perceived support from management will mediate the positive relationship between P-O fit and intent to utilize FWA’s, and again a significant, partial mediation was found to exist. A key aspect of employee perception of supportive management is managers having confidence in employees’ abilities to carry out their jobs when and where they see fit (Yoon, Beatty & Suh, 2001), which is in line with the findings of this study and its link to intention to utilize flexibility arrangements. In addition to perceived support from management, future research can include perceived organizational climates towards flexible working in general, in order to grasp a more complete understanding of the dynamics that exist in employee intention to utilize FWA’s. Furthermore, macro-level as well as micro-level factors should be considered and empirically investigated in the same study, which other studies have noted a significant lack of in the current literature (Greenberg & Landry, 2011). Another consideration to keep in mind when evaluating the results of this study is the fact that level of education, age, and gender did not significantly correlate
with any of the research variables. Focusing on gender, this is an interesting finding, considering that research has found that men in white-collar professions have reported the highest levels of perceived workplace flexibility (Williams, Blair-Loy & Berdahl, 2013) and women tend to report feeling they have less power in flexible arrangement negotiations with management (Greenberg & Landry, 2011). However, this study found no significant differences in terms of gender when it came to intent to utilize FWA’s.
Limitations
This study was not without its limitations, which should be contemplated in the context of understanding the results. The sample for this study could have benefited from a larger sample size in order to achieve more precise results. However, since a significant relationship was found for the main effect in such a small sample size, it can raise confidence that such a relationship exists in a larger context. This study is limited in terms of generalizability of the findings, since the sample was not taken from a known population and respondents were not randomly selected, but were known friends and family of the researcher.
Furthermore, common method bias is of course also a limitation, since this study utilized a self-reported cross-sectional design. As this study was trying to tap into respondent’s attitudes on latent constructs, common method bias can affect reliability and validity, and this is because the same method was used to measure each construct. This has the potential to cause method-specific variance, causing bias in the resulting relationships between variables. In order for future research to avoid these issues, gathering data at different points in time as well as gathering data using different methods, such as utilizing in-person interviews as well, can help reduce the effects of this issue. It is also important to reiterate that due to this survey having a cross-sectional design, causality is not inferred in this study, but must stay in the realm of inferring
relationships between constructs. This methodology makes it impossible to completely rule out other predictors and explaining variables that might have had an effect on the results, and after further consideration this study certainly would have benefited from including macro-level factors such as industry sector and managerial position.
Conclusion
This study contributed to the literature on flexible workplace arrangement usage by introducing Person to Organization fit as a significant predictor, with comfortability self-expressing in the workplace and perceived support from management also emerging as important underlying mechanisms.
References
Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work–Family Conflict and Flexible Work Arrangements: Deconstructing Flexibility. Personnel psychology, 66(2), 345-376. doi:10.1111/peps.12012
Anderson, S. E., Coffey, B. S., & Byerly, R. T. (2002). Formal Organizational Initiatives and Informal Workplace Practices: Links to Work-Family Conflict and Job-Related
Outcomes. Journal of Management, 28(6), 787–810. doi:10.1177/014920630202800605 Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the Individual and the Organization. Oxford, England: Wiley. Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Control in Self-Managing
Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 408. doi:10.2307/2393374
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator–Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Bretz, R. D., Jr., & Judge, T. A. (1992). The Relationship Between Person-Organization Fit and Career Success (CAHRS Working Paper #92-11). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies.
Bright, L. (2007). Does Person-Organization Fit Mediate the Relationship Between Public Service Motivation and the Job Performance of Public Employees? Review of Public Personnel Administration,27(4), 361-379. doi:10.1177/0734371X07307149
Brown, S. P., & Leigh, T. W. (1996). A New Look at Psychological Climate and Its Relationship to Job Involvement, Effort, and Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,81(4), 358-368. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.81.4.358
Butts, M. M., Casper, W. J., & Yang, T. S. (2013). How Important Are Work–Family Support Policies? A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Their Effects on Employee Outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 1. doi:10.1037/a0030389
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Pay Preferences and Job Search Decisions: A Person-Organization Fit Perspective. Personnel Psychology,47(2), 317-348. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01727.x
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Person–Organization Fit, Job Choice Decisions, and Organizational Entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,67(3), 294-311. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0081
Cable, D. M., & Derue, D. S. (2002). The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Subjective Fit Perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology,87(5), 875-884. doi:10.1037/0021- 9010.87.5.875
Demerouti, E., Derks, D., Brummelhuis, L. L., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). New Ways of Working: Impact on Working Conditions, Work–Family Balance, and Well-Being. The Impact of ICT on Quality of Working Life,123-141. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-8854-0_8
Dick, P., & Hyde, R. (2006). Consent as Resistance, Resistance as Consent: Re-Reading Part-Time Professionals Acceptance of Their Marginal Positions. Gender, Work and Organization,13(6), 543-564. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2006.00322.x
Eaton, S.C. & Bailyn, L. (2000). “Career as Life Path: Tracing Work and Life Strategies of Biotech Professionals.” Career Frontiers: New Conceptions of Working Lives. pp. 177-198. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eaton, S. C. (2003). If You Can Use Them: Flexibility Policies, Organizational Commitment, and Perceived Performance. Industrial Relations,42(2), 145-167. doi:10.1111/1468-232x.00285
Friedman, D. E., & Johnson, A. A. (1997). Moving from Programs to Culture Change: The Next Stage for the Corporate Work–Family Agenda. In S. Parasuraman & J. H. Greenhaus Eds., Integrating Work and Family: Challenges and Choices for a Changing World pp. 192–208. Westport, CT, Qurom Books.
Greenberg, D., & Landry, E. M. (2011). Negotiating a Flexible Work Arrangement: How Women Navigate the Influence of Power and Organizational Context. Journal of Organizational Behavior,32(8), 1163-1188. doi:10.1002/job.750
Grzywacz, J. G., Carlson, D. S., & Shulkin, S. (2008). Schedule Flexibility and Stress: Linking Formal Flexible Arrangements and Perceived Flexibility to Employee Health.
Community, Work & Family,11(2), 199-214. doi:10.1080/13668800802024652
Hall, L., & Atkinson, C. (2006). Improving Working Lives: Flexible Working and the Role of Employee Control. Employee Relations,28(4), 374-386.
doi:10.1108/01425450610673420
Hassan, M., Akram, A., & Naz, S. (2012). The Relationship between Person Organization Fit, Person-Job-Fit and Turnover Intention in Banking Sector of Pakistan: The Mediating Role of Psychological Climate. International Journal of Human Resource Studies,2(3), 172. doi:10.5296/ijhrs.v2i3.2286
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from
Hayman, J. R. (2009). Flexible Work Arrangements: Exploring the Linkages between Perceived Usability of Flexible Work Schedules and Work/Life Balance. Community, Work & Family,12 (3), 327-338. doi:10.1080/13668800902966331
Hill, E. J., Jacob, J. I., Shannon, L. L., Brennan, R. T., Blanchard, V. L., & Martinengo, G. (2008). Exploring the Relationship of Workplace Flexibility, Gender, and Life Stage to Family-to-Work Conflict, and Stress and Burnout. Community, Work & Family,11(2), 165-181. doi:10.1080/13668800802027564
Hyman, J., & Summers, J. (2004). Lacking balance? Personnel Review,33(4), 418-429. doi:10.1108/00483480410539498
James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. (1974). Organizational Climate: A Review of Theory and Research. Psychological Bulletin, 81(12), 1096-1112. doi:10.1037/h0037511
Kelly, E. L., & Kalev, A. (2006). Managing Flexible Work Arrangements in US Organizations: Formalized Discretion or ‘A Right to Ask’. Socio-Economic Review,4(3), 379-416. doi:10.1093/ser/mwl001
Kiewitz, C., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., & Castro, S. L. (2002). The Role of Psychological Climate in Neutralizing the Effects of Organizational Politics on Work
Outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,32(6), 1189-1207. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb01431.x
Kirby, E. L. (2000). Should I Do As You Say or Do As You Do? Mixed Messages About Work and Family. Electronic Journal of Communication, 10(3), 4.
Kirby, E. L., & Krone, K. J. (2002). "The Policy Exists but You Can't Really Use It": Communication and the Structuration of Work-Family Policies. Journal of Applied Communication Research,30(1), 50-77. doi:10.1080/ 00909880216577
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person‐Organization Fit: An Integrative Review of its Conceptualizations, Measurement, and Implications. Personnel Psychology, 49 (1), 1-49.
doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x
Larson, G.S. & Tompkins, P.K. (2005) Ambivalence and Resistance: A Study of Management in a Concertive Control System, Communication Monographs,72(1), 1-21
doi:10.1080/0363775052000342508
Lopez, T. B. (1999). “Person-Organization Fit: A Market Orientation-Customer Orientation Perspective”. 1–3. http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research.
Menezes, L. M., & Kelliher, C. (2011). Flexible Working and Performance: A Systematic Review of the Evidence for a Business Case. International Journal of Management Reviews,13(4), 452-474. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00301.x
Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the Workplace: A Communication Perspective on Millennials’ Organizational Relationships and Performance. Journal of Business and Psychology,25(2), 225-238. doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9172-7
O'Driscoll, M. P., Poelmans, S., Spector, P. E., Kalliath, T., Allen, T. D., Cooper, C. L., & Sanchez, J. I. (2003). Family-Responsive Interventions, Perceived Organizational and Supervisor Support, Work-Family Conflict, and Psychological Strain. International Journal of Stress Management, 10(4), 326-344. doi: 10.1037/1072-5245.10.4.326
Ogbor, J. O. (2001). Critical Theory and the Hegemony of Corporate Culture. Journal of Organizational Change Movement,14(6), 590-608. doi:10.1108/09534810110408015
O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 487-516. doi: 10.2307/256404
Poelmans, S. A., Chinchilla, N., & Cardona, P. (2003). The Adoption of Family‐Friendly HRM Policies. International Journal of Manpower,24(2), 128-147.
doi:10.1108/01437720310475394
Raghuram, S., & Wiesenfeld, B. (2004). Work-Nonwork Conflict and Job Stress Among Virtual Workers. Human Resource Management,43(2-3), 259-277. doi:10.1002/hrm.20019 Schneider, B. (1987). The People Make The Place. Personnel Psychology, 40(3), 437-453.
doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x
Sekiguchi, T. (2004). Person-Organization Fit and Person-Job Fit in Employee Selection: A Review of the Literature. Osaka Keidai Ronshu, 54, 179-191
Shalley, C., Gilson, L., & Blum, T. (2000). Matching Creativity Requirements and the Work Environment: Effects on Satisfaction and Intentions to Leave. The Academy of Management Journal,43(2), 215-223. doi:10.2307/1556378
Thompson, C. A., Beauvais, L. L., & Lyness, K. S. (1999). When Work–Family Benefits Are Not Enough: The Influence of Work–Family Culture on Benefit Utilization,
Organizational Attachment, and Work–Family Conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior,54(3), 392-415. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1998.1681
Tugal, F. N., & Kilic, K. C. (2015). Person-Organization Fit: It’s Relationships with Job
Attitudes and Behaviors of Turkish Academicians. International Review of Management and Marketing,5(4), 195-202.
Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., & Wagner, S. H. (2003). A Meta-Analysis of Relations Between Person–Organization Fit and Work Attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior,63(3), 473-489. doi:10.1016/s0001-8791(02)00036-2
Williams, J. C., Blair-Loy, M., & Berdahl, J. L. (2013). Cultural Schemas, Social Class, and the Flexibility Stigma. Journal of Social Issues,69(2), 209-234. doi:10.1111/josi.12012 Wise, S., & Bond, S. (2003). Work‐life policy: Does It Do Exactly What It Says on The
Tin? Women in Management Review,18(1/2), 20-31. doi:10.1108/09649420310462307 Yoon, M. H., Beatty, S. E., & Suh, J. (2001). The Effect of Work Climate on Critical Employee
and Customer Outcomes. International Journal of Service Industry Management,12(5), 500-521. doi:10.1108/eum0000000006095
Appendix A – Factor Analyses 1. Person to Organization Fit
Total Variance Explained
Factor Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.557 85.236 85.236
2 .245 8.153 93.389
3 .198 6.611 100.000
Item Factor loading
The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization values.
.87 My personal values match my organization’s values and
culture.
.88 My organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with
the things that I value in life.
.91
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .76, above the recommended value of .60. Additionally, the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ2 (3) = 286.3, p < .000)
2. Self-expression in the workplace
Total Variance Explained
Factor Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.179 72.629 72.629
2 .580 19.318 91.946
3 .242 8.054 100.000
Item Factor loading
There are parts of myself that I do not feel free communicating at work (recoded positively for this analysis)
.81
I feel free to be completely myself at work .92
The feelings that I communicate at work are my true feelings .82
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .63, above the recommended value of .60. Additionally, the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ2 (3) = 161.8, p < .000)
3. Perceived Support from Management
Total Variance Explained
Factor Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.960 74.006 74.006 2 .532 13,307 87.314 3 4 .271 .237 6.771 5.915 94.085 100.000
Item Factor loading
My manager is supportive of my ideas and ways of getting things done
.85 My manager is flexible about how I choose to accomplish my
job objectives
.70 My manager gives me authority to do my job as I see fit
I can trust my manager to back me up on decisions I make in the field
.88 .80
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .79, above the recommended value of .60. Additionally, the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ2 (6) =313.7, p < .000)
4. Intent to utilize FWA’s
Total Variance Explained
Factor Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.490 83.007 83.007
2 .367 12.220 95.227
3 .143 4.773 100.000
Item Factor loading
In general, I feel free to ask to utilize the workplace flexibility arrangements offered by my current employer
.90 Asking to utilize my current employer’s flexible workplace
arrangements will in no way jeopardize my future with the
company .75
Overall, I feel at ease asking my manager to use any of the workplace flexibility arrangements offered at my current
company .95
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .71, above the recommended value of .60. Additionally, the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ2 (3) = 280.4, p < .000).
Appendix B: Table 2: Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 M 3.66 3.35 3.86 3.72 33.79 SD .91 .95 .83 .95 9.39 Range 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 0 1 21-60 0-1 .91 .81 .88 .90
