BAM2014 This paper is from the BAM2014 Conference Proceedings

About BAM

The British Academy of Management (BAM) is the leading authority on the academic field of

management in the UK, supporting and representing the community of scholars and engaging with

international peers.

http://www.bam.ac.uk/

The Influences of Person-organization Fit on Job Satisfaction in Chinese Catering Service Industry： An Integrated Mediation and Moderation Model

ABSTRACT

Abstract：Person-organization fit mainly discusses the compatibility between individuals and organizations, as well as important antecedents to and outcomes of fit. It is the most widely used theory in the area of job stress research. Based on the theory of conservation of resources, the current research examined the effect of person-organization fit on employee’s job satisfaction, and the interactive effects of supervisor support and person-organization fit on employee’s job stress. A survey of 225 employees in 12 restaurants found that: (1) job stress mediates the relationships between person-organization fit and job satisfaction; (2) supervisor support moderates the linkage of person-organization fit, job stress and job satisfaction. The corresponding mediated moderation model was supported except for the moderation direction. The theoretical implications, practical implications, and future research directions of the findings were discussed. Keywords: Chinese management; Service Industry; Person-organization Fit; Job Satisfaction; Stress; Mediation; Moderation

1

The Influences of Person-organization Fit on Job Satisfaction in Chinese Catering Service Industry： An Integrated Mediation and Moderation Model

INTRODUCTION Research Background

Organizations operate in a very competitive global environment and given that most organizations’ major expense is labour cost, any steps taken to reduce these costs are potentially beneficial. However, while downsizing and automation can be effective, these approaches have their own disadvantages. Increasing productivity and reducing employee turnover at the same time are preferable strategies. The increased recognition of employees as a critical resource in the competitive global marketplace has sustained the interest of scholars’ to understand the effects of person-organization (P-O) fit on employee work attitude and behaviour (Verquer, Beehr , & Wagner,2003; Hoffman & Woehr, 2006). P-O fit pertains to a match between individual and organizational characteristics (George, 1992; Kristof, 1996). It is different from Person-group as it focuses on the interpersonal compatibility between individuals and their work group (Werbel & Gilliland, 1999). A number of related fit terms exist. The relationship between a person’s characteristics and those of the job or tasks that are performed at work is called Person-job fit (Kristof, 1996). The dyadic relationships concerning the match between supervisors and subordinates are defined as Person-supervisor fit (Van Vianen, 2000). For organizations, two core goals of human resources management (HRM) are productivity and quality of work, and research has indicated that the degree of fit between the person and the organization is related to both productivity and employee turnover (Silverthorne, 2004). Achieving a high degree of P-O fit is often seen as key in retaining workforces with high flexibility and the organizational commitment necessary to meet competitive challenges.

In P-O fit studies, work attitudes (defined as evaluative tendencies toward one’s job, including job satisfaction and organizational commitment) and turnover intention are among the criteria most frequently examined (Cable & Judge, 1996; Finegan, 2000; Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner, 2003; Silverthorne, 2004; Yichi, Ying, & Peng, 2005; Mitchell, 2007; Moynihan & Pandey, 2008; Ambrose, Arnaud, & Schminke, 2008). Job satisfaction, as one such work attitude is an important psychological indicator of enterprise employees' career quality. However, although past research has established the linkage between P-O fit and employee job satisfaction, several important questions still remain unaddressed.

First, little is known about the mechanisms that underpin P-O fit’s demonstrated influence on work attitude and behaviour (Arthur, Bell, Villado, & Doverspike, 2006). What are the important moderator variables that change the strength of an effect or relationship between two variables or indicate when or under what conditions a particular effect can be expected, and what are mediator variables that specify how or why a particular effect or relationship occurs and help describe the psychological process that occurs to create the relationship? For example, recently a new discovery is that Peng, Lee, and Tseng (2014) demonstrated that the work engagement of participants mediated the impact of P-O fit on turnover intention. There are other potentially important mechanisms, and this study we examine the role of stress as one of these mediators. This is because the core premise of P-E fit theory shows that stress arises not from the person or environment separately, but rather by their fit or congruence with one another (Pervin, 1989; Eulberg, Weekley, & Bhagat, 1988; Edwards & Cooper, 1990). We know from previous research that job stress is caused by many different factors. The influential factors from individuals themselves are self-efficacy (Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008), CSE (Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2002), and optimism (Chang, Rand, & Strunk, 2000) while the organization determinants generally are

2

organizational politics and organizational support (Parker & DeCotiis, 1983; Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey, & Toth, 1997). We also know that P-O fit, as “the compatibility between individuals and organizations” is the antecedent of burnout (Siegall & McDonald, 2004). According to the same logic, we argue that poor P-O fit is likely also to lead to stress. As for the outcomes of the stress, many studies have shown that subordinates with lower job stress tend to have higher job satisfaction (Decker & Borgen, 1993; Ramirez, Graham, Richards, Gregory, & Cull, 1996; Huang, 2009; Singh & Ashish, 2011). Employees with higher P-O fit also have higher job satisfaction (Michelle, Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner, 2003）.Thus, we argue that it is more likely that a high P-O fit employee would have high job satisfaction as a result of decreased job stress. It is necessary for us to examine these possibilities for helping employees manage their work stress better.

Second, fit theorists continue to call for research to incorporate important situational characteristics that can moderate fit-outcome relationships (Kristof, 1996; Yukl, 2002; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005; Erdogan and Enders, 2007). For example, Kristof (1996) contended that individual and organizational factors could moderate the relationships between fit and its consequences, and suggested that managers could influence the strength of the relationship between fit and individual outcomes. To date, empirical studies about moderation effect, though few in number, have predominantly looked at the moderating effects of individual difference variables (Posner, 1992; Resick, Baltes, & Shantz, 2007; Park, Monnot, Jacob, & Wagner, 2011). Examining individual moderators enhances theory by identifying the conditions under which P-O fit is related to outcomes. Assessing organizational moderators is also of practical significance for managing the relationship between P-O fit and work attitudes. It might enable organizations to enhance organizational membership if there is low P-O fit. In the present study, we focus on the situational variable of supervisor support in explaining the relationship between the P-O fit and job satisfaction, so as to highlight its significance for organizations and employees. Previous reviews of empirical studies have examined the role of social support in the stressor-strain relationship (e.g., Lin, 1986; Alloway & Bebbington, 1987; Schwartzer & Leppin, 1991). Employee perceptions of supervisory support always can reduce stress and increase job satisfaction (Babin, & Boles, 1996). Based on what we have discussed above, it crucially important for research to put these variables, namely P-O fit, supervisor support, job stress and job satisfaction, all together under a complete model to make clear the relationships between them.

Third, the important predictors of P-O fit are not assumed to be culture-bound. However, the majority of research on P-O fit has been in western settings and we need research in a new cultural setting in order to assess the generalizability of the P-O fit theory ( Kristof-Brown & Guay,2010). Furthermore, as to its outcomes, although we have focused on job satisfaction, there has been little attention paid to the underlying process between P-O fit and job satisfaction in non-western cultures so far (Silverthorne, 2004). Even in China, research has mainly focused on the main direct effect of P-O fit on employee attitudes and behaviour (Chen Weiqi & Wang Zhongming, 2007; Wang Zhong & Zhang Lin, 2010).The possibility remains that although a factor-such as supervisor support-might be found to have important effects across cultural settings, the way in which that variable creates such affects remains culturally sensitive. What is special about Chinese society is the fact that guanxi is an indigenous Chinese construct that plays a crucial role in daily life (Tsang, 1998). It has historical and cultural roots in Confucianism (King, 1991).We define the indigenous Chinese construct of guanxi as an informal, particularistic personal connection between two individuals who are bounded by an implicit psychological contract to follow the social norm of maintaining a long term relationship, mutual commitment, loyalty, and obligation (Chen & Chen, 2004). It is said that "the Chinese manager must steer through a sea of guanxi” (Wall Jr,

3

1990). Chinese enterprises particularly emphasize the exchange relationship between leaders and subordinates, which is closely related to the division of "insiders" and "outsiders” (Gabrenya & Hwang, 1996). Supervisors who have good guanxi with a subordinate might give the subordinate a better job assignment, try his/her best to help the subordinate to climb the organizational ladder, and give him/her more year-end bonuses (Law, Wong, Wang, & Wang, 2000). Supervisors also "owe" their associates their success, not necessarily because of friendship or role obligation due to particularistic ties between the two individuals (Farh, Tsui, Xin, & Cheng, 1998). Therefore, it is important to understand the interaction effects between P-O fit and supervisor support (as a situational variable), and in turn understand how this influences job satisfaction in the Chinese context.

Finally, with increasing globalization and international competition, recruiting, retaining and managing human resources plays a central role in increasing the competitiveness of organizations (Nadiri & Tanova, 2010).

In this study, we examine the above relationships in a specific sectoral context - the service industry hospitality sector - which is one in which increasing employees’ job satisfaction will contribute to the increased competitiveness of the organizations and better future performance (Nadiri & Tanova, 2010). Therefore, the current research aims to fill in the research gap by first cross-validating the linkage between P-O fit and job satisfaction and then further exploring the underlying mechanism and boundary conditions between them.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES P-O Fit and Job Satisfaction

Researchers can examine “fit” across a number of dimensions. Using values has been seen as the most suitable way of operationalizing fit, because values constitute a reliable guide to understanding a wide range of subsequent work attitudes and behaviour (Rokeach, 1968). The majority of empirical studies in the 1990s therefore concentrated on value congruence, with P-O fit reflecting the congruence between patterns of organizational values and patterns of individual values (Chatman, 1989). O'Reilly III, Chatman, and Caldwell (1991) demonstrated that this fit between an individual's preference for a particular culture and the culture of the organization the person joins, is related to commitment, satisfaction, and turnover. Vancouver and Schmitt (1991) investigated relationships between organization members' agreement on organizational goals and its impact on their attitudes and intentions. Using data from 356 principals and 14,721 teachers, each rating the importance of goals for their school, they found goal congruence was positively related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment was negatively related to intention to quit. By the early 2000s, there was sufficient evidence to test the strength of such effects. Michelle, Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner（2003）conducted a meta-analytic review of 21 studies on the relationship between P-O fit and job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention. Four specific moderators were investigated: the type of fit measure, method of calculating fit, dimensions of fit, and use of an established measure of P-O fit. They found mean correlations in the mid to high .20s for P-O fit with satisfaction and commitment, while the mean effect size between P-O fit and turnover intention was -.18.

The importance of P-O fit in Chinese organizations has also been demonstrated, though these studies have mainly been intended to test the main direct effect of P-O fit on employee attitude and behaviour. Chen Weiqi, Wang Zhongming (2007) found that that both person-job matching and person-organization matching were important in predicting both employees’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. From the perspective of P-O fit theory, Wang Zhong, and Zhang Lin (2010) investigated relationships between P-O fit and job satisfaction, and their influence on turnover intention. The results indicate P-O fit has positive influences on job satisfaction; P-O fit has negative influence on turnover intention;

4

two dimensions of job satisfaction-working pressure satisfaction and management factor satisfaction-have medium influences on the effects of P-O fit on turnover intention. In sum, there are a large number of researches in literature that suggest high P-O fit causes positive work attitudes (job satisfaction). Thus, to confirm the results of previous studies, we put forward the first hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Peron-organization fit is positively related to employees' job satisfaction.

Job Stress’s Mediating Effect Previous research has shown the following. Maslach and Leiter (1997) addressed the

challenge by formulating a model that focuses on the degree of match, or mismatch, between the person and six domains of his or her job environment. The greater the gap, or mismatch, between the person and the job, the greater the likelihood of burnout; conversely, the greater the match (or fit), the greater the likelihood of engagement with work. This model has brought order to the wide variety of situational correlates by proposing six areas of work life that encompass the central relationships with burnout: workload, control, reward, community, fairness, and values. Burnout arises from chronic mismatches between people and their work setting in terms of some or all of these six areas. The logic behind P-E fit approach to stress can be applied to P-O fit, which is also one form of P-E fit (Kristof, 1996). Ahsan, Abdullah, Fie, and Alam (2009) investigated the relationship between job stress and job satisfaction by the sample consists of a public university academician from Klang Valley area in Malaysia. The results showed that there is significant negative relationship between job stress and job satisfaction. As such, Klassen, Usher, and Bong (2010) examined how teachers’ collective efficacy (TCE), job stress, and the cultural dimension of collectivism are associated with job satisfaction for 500 teachers from Canada, Korea (South Korea or Republic of Korea), and the United States. Multigroup path analysis revealed that job stress was negatively related to job satisfaction for North American teachers (i.e., teachers from Canada and the United States). From such studies, we postulate our second hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2：Job stress mediates the relationships between P-O fit and job satisfaction.

Supervisor Support’s Moderating Effect Employees prefer and attach great importance to the feedback and support from

people close to them (Kottke & Sharafinski, 1988). This study focuses on employee experiences of supervisor support. It refers to the extent to which employees perceive supervisors offer employees support, encouragement and concern (Burke, Borucki and Hurley, 1992) which is a strong determinant of job satisfaction in a wide variety of work settings (Yukl.1989). Of course, not every employee can develop good guanxi with his\her immediate supervisor, therefore consistent with the arguments made earlier, we expect that individual differences in getting supervisory support would influence the link between P-O fit and its outcomes, especially in China.

According to the theory of conservation of resources, people strive to retain, protect, and build resources. What is threatening to them is the potential or actual loss of these valued resources. Psychological stress is defined as a reaction to the environment in which there is (a) the threat of a net loss of resources, (b) the net loss of resources, or (c) a lack of resource gain following the investment of resources. Either perceived and actual loss or lack of gain is sufficient for producing stress (Hobfoll, 1989). Employees’ stress comes from their comprehensive cognition of the current resources, the possession situation and its future possibility of loss. The support and backing of a supervisor, depends on whether or not they consider thoughtfully, feedback promptly, are believed to be helpful for employees to overcome work-related problems (Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004). This situational resource, as a kind of social support, has been proposed as a potential buffer against job stress (Haines,

5

Hurlbert, & Zimmer, 1991; Johnson & Hall, 1988). Using the theory of conservation of resources, Viswesvaran, Sanchez, and Fisher (1999) found that social support reduced the strains experienced, social support mitigated perceived stressors, and social support moderated the stressor-strain relationship. Gray-Stanley, Muramatsu, Heller, Hughes, Johnson, and Ramirez-Valles’s (2000) also showed that supervisor support significantly lessened employees' work pressure.

From the above we can see that: person-organization fit perceptions are related to perceived organizational support (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchinson, & Sowa, 1986); supervisors are considered agents of the organization; and their treatment of subordinates can influence how subordinates perceive their relationship with the organization (Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002). Thus we suggest that when employees receive high supervisor support (and thus enjoy discretion, autonomy, support and developmental opportunities) they tend to attribute positive motives to the practices and policies of the organization with regard to them. However, when employees receive low supervisor support, thus attributing negative motives to the practices and policies of the organization with regard to them, they may doubt whether they can trust and build a long term relationship with the organization, even if they have high value congruence with it. Based on what we have discussed above, the formation of high supervisor support buffers the negative effect of low P-O fit on job stress, while low supervisor support reduces the positive influence of high P-O fit on job stress. Furthermore, they may even facilitate each other. For example, an investigation of 182 real-estate salespersons by Netemeyer and Boles (1997) indicated that employees with higher supervisor support were more likely to have higher P-O fit. Therefore, we put forward our third hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3: Supervisor support moderates the effects of P-O fit on job stress, such that the negative relationship between person-organization fit and job stress will be stronger for employees who have higher supervisor support.

Generalized Model Combining Hypotheses 2, 3 together, we put forward an integrated model containing

mediation and moderation effects. Firstly, we seek to verify the mediating role of job stress between P-O fit and job satisfaction, revealing another “black box” of P-O fit’s mechanism. Secondly, we intend to uncover the moderating effect of supervisor support on the process that P-O fit exerts influence on job stress, and then on job satisfaction, illustrating some new mechanisms and boundary conditions between P-O fit and job satisfaction. This mediated moderation model will help us to develop a comprehensive understanding for the relationships among the researched variables. Thus, we put forward the fourth hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: Supervisor support moderates the effects of P-O fit’s on job stress, such that the indirect effect of P-O fit’s and job satisfaction through job stress will be stronger for employees who have higher supervisor support. The complete model for this research is shown in Figure 1.

---------------------------------- Insert Figure1 about here

----------------------------------

RESEARCH METHOD Sample and Procedure

Data were collected from the employees in twelve catering service organizations in Beijing. Meetings were scheduled to inform the employees about the general purpose of the study, to emphasize confidentiality, and to administer questionnaires. Questionnaires were completed during working hours. The final sample consisted of 225 employees with a response of 83.33%. 33.3% were male, with the average 22.87 years old, and average 11.91

6

months dyadic tenure with their immediate supervisors. Measures

We created a Chinese version of all the measures by following the translation-back-translation procedure. The Chinese version of all the scales was translated by a Chinese bilingual translator. A native English speaker with good Chinese proficiency was then asked to back-translate these items (Brislin, 1980). After the two translators compared the back-translation with the original scale and refined the Chinese translation through discussion, 25 volunteers participated in a preliminary test. According to their feedback, the authors revised the questionnaires and formed the final version. For each item, the response was recorded on a six-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) with the exception of demographic variables.

P-O Fit. P-O fit was measured using a nine-item scale developed by Cable and Derue (2002). The following items were used: “The match is very good between the demands of my job and my personal skills”, “My personal values match my organization’s values and culture”. Cronbach’ s alpha was .833.

Supervisor Support. Four items of this measure were adopted from Cheng’s (2003) research, which was developed based on Eisenberger et al.’s (1986) and Yoon and Thye ’s (2000) scales. The questionnaire contains only 4 items. Example items included: “My supervisor listens to my opinions”, “My supervisor provides assistance to staff’’. Cronbach’s alpha was .816.

Job Stress. We adopted the scale including two dimensions (time stress and anxiety) developed by Parker and Decotiis (1983). Cronbach’s alpha for the componets treated as scales are .86 and .74 respectively. The corrected item-total score correlations for time stress range from .61 to .79, and for anxiety, from .61 to .75.The correlation between the factors used as scales was .54, indicating considerable nonoverlapping variance in the dimensions(Parker & Decotiis ,1983). Example items included “many people at my level in the company get burned out by job demands”, “Working here leaves little time for other activities”. Cronbach’s alpha was .857.

Job Satisfaction. The scale for measuring job satisfaction was consisted of six items taken from Tsui, Egan, O'Reilly (1991). The internal consistency was 0.83. By exploratory factor analysis (Li, 2003), results showed that the employee satisfaction questionnaire had a one dimensional structure. The extracted factors explained 44.14% of the total variance. Example items included “I am satisfied with the opportunities which exist in this organization for advancement (promotion)?”, “I am satisfied with my relations with others in the organization with whom I work.” Cronbach’s alpha was .848.

Control Variables. To examine the independent variables’ unique contributions in predicting the mediator and outcome variables, we measured and controlled for the effects of participants’ gender（Lok & Crawford, 2004), age（Lok & Crawford, 2004), education（Lok & Crawford, 2004) and tenure（Bedeian, Ferris, & Kacmar, 1992).

RESULTS

Common Method Bias Since we collected self-report data, to examine whether common method bias influenced

our study, we conducted the Harman single-factor test. This requires loading all the measures in a study into an exploratory factor analysis, with the assumption that the presence of CMV is indicated by the emergence of either a single factor or a general factor accounting for the majority of covariance among measures (Podsakoff etal. 2003, p.889). By conducting factor analysis with no rotation, we found that a two-factor model may be the most appropriate rather than single-factor one. The first factor explained 46.6% covariance. Based on these results, we preliminary concluded that common method bias was a potential issue. However,

7

quadratic and interaction effects cannot be artifacts of CMV. To the contrary, both quadratic and interaction terms can be severely deflated through CMV, making them more difficult to detect through statistical means (Siemsen Roth & Oliveira, 2010). Hence, based on our research results, we conclude that common method bias is not significant in our study. Descriptions and Correlations

Means, standard deviations and correlations among variables are presented in Table 1. P-O fit was positively correlated with supervisor support (r=.383，p<.01), job satisfaction（r=.422，p<.01）, and was negatively correlated with job stress (r=-.187，p<.01). Job stress was negatively correlated with supervisor support (r=-.243 ， p<.01) and job satisfaction（r=-.429，p<.01）. Job satisfaction was positively correlated with supervisor support (r=.513，p<.01). The descriptive statistics and inter-correlations among variables are shown in Table 1.

---------------------------------- Insert Table 1 about here

---------------------------------- Hierarchical regressions were performed to test the main and the moderated model.

Results illustrated in Table 2 showed that after controlling for demographic variables (gender, age, education and tenure), the effect of P-O fit on job satisfaction (β=0.554, p<.001) was significant.

In addition, P-O fit was negatively related to job stress (β=-0.195, p<.01), which provided the basis for the mediation effect. The commonly used Baron and Kenny (1986) approach has low statistical power. However, the Sobel test is of high statistical power with low Type I error rates. Results indicated that job stress significantly mediated the links between P-O fit and job satisfaction.

We test the moderating effect in step 4, Model 2 in Table 2. Results indicated that the interaction of P-O fit and supervisor support was significant in predicting job stress (β=0.110，p=0.096).

To test for mediated moderation, we followed the procedures outlined by Morgan-Lopez and MacKinnon (2006) to obtain estimates of the respective mediated moderation effects. Specifically, we first regressed the mediator on the control, independent, and moderator variables, as well as the interactions between the independent variables and the moderator. Next, we regressed the dependent variable on the control, mediator, independent, and moderator variables, as well as the interactions between the independent variables and the moderator. The estimate of the indirect (mediated moderation) effect is the product of the path from the respective interaction term to the mediator and the path from the mediator to the dependent variable (Kearney & Gebert, 2009；Morgan-Lopez & MacKinnon, 2006).To test the statistical significance of the respective indirect, we used Sobel test, as suggested by MacKinnon, Lockwood, and Williams (2004). As illustrated in table 2, the interactions between P-O fit and supervisor support was significant in predicting job stress (β=0.110, p=0.096).It was also found that after controlling for other variables, the effects of job stress on job satisfaction was significant. The Sobel test illustrated that job stress mediated the interactions between P-O fit and Job satisfaction. To further examine the patterns of interaction, we plotted the interactive effect figure based on the procedures introduced by Akien and West (1991). As Figure 2 shows, supervisor support moderates the mediation effect between P-O fit and job satisfaction. The effect of employees with low supervisor support indirectly through their job stress on job satisfaction is relatively stronger. Therefore, we conclude Hypothesis 3 is not supported, the direction of moderation effect is in the opposite direction.

8

---------------------------------- Insert Table 2, 3 and Figure 2 about here

----------------------------------

CONCLUSIONS Research Conclusions

First, our research confirms that P-O fit positively predicts job satisfaction; and job stress mediates the relationships between P-O fit and job satisfaction. According to these results, we can see that both an individual’s job stress and job satisfaction reflect the fit between the individual and the organization. This is consistent with the widely accepted Person-environment fit approach to stress among organizational stress researchers (Eulgerg, Weeley & Bhagat, 1988). Positive work attitudes also result from P-O fit conceptualized from a needs-supplies perspective as well as from supplementary perspectives (Kristof, 1996). Therefore, high person-organization fit can improve an employees' working state, which is also the primary premise and management foundation for building a harmonious organization.

Second, this research further reveals some boundary conditions for the mechanism of P-O fit. Our finding on the moderation effect of supervisor support enriches existing knowledge about P-O fit.

Surprisingly, we found that the relationship between P-O fit and job stress is stronger among subordinates with lower supervisor support, which in turn brings a relatively stronger relationship between P-O fit and job satisfaction. In other words, the mediating effect of job stress is stronger among these subordinators, compared with those with higher supervisor support. High supervisor support does not enhance the relationship between P-O fit and job stress as we previously assumed. Different levels of supervisor support means leaders form relationships of varying quality with different subordinates. This phenomenon has root in social exchange theory which predicts that a person may receive resources from one relationship (Molm, Peterson, & Takahashi, 2001). Our study’s result is in contrast to Witt et al.’s research which has been shown that fit is more strongly related to satisfaction for employees who have a strong exchange ideology (i.e., have high social exchange expectations) than for those with weaker ideologies (Witt, Hilton, & Hellman, 1993).Our study result may be attributed to several factors: leaders’ helping behaviour is likely to be superficial, or cannot solve the employee's real problems. Consequently, it causes the opposite effect. In addition, the stressful leaders who provide some friendly help to employees can cause pressure instead. Interaction with this kind of leader may be thought of as a source of pressure (Kaufmann & Beehr, 1986). Another possibility is that when individuals who have experienced stress get help from leaders whose behaviour shows the organization far worse than what individuals previously thought, a reverse buffer effect happens. This combination may result in more negative consequences, which contribute to employee's job stress（Beehr, 1985). Theoretical Implications

The present study provides important theoretical contributions to the literature on P-O fit, job satisfaction, job stress, and supervisor support. We have analyzed the influencing process of P-O fit on job satisfaction, which in turn helps us to understand the essential relationship between them in both the academic field and practice field.

Firstly, our findings revealed that the relationship between P-O fit and job satisfaction is indirectly linked through job stress. Besides the fundamental premise of P-E fit theory as we mentioned before, our research result can be illustrated by the COR theory. According to the theory of conservation of resources, people strive to retain, protect, and build resources. What is threatening to them is the potential or actual loss of these valued resources. Psychological stress is defined as a reaction to the environment in which there is (a) the threat of a net loss

9

of resources, (b) actual net loss of resources, or (c) a lack of resource gain following the investment of resources. Either perceived and actual loss or lack of gain is sufficient for producing stress (Hobfoll, 1989). A tenet of the COR theory is that individuals try to protect and conserve ‘‘things’’ they value ( Hobfoll, 2001). Perceived P-J fit serves as a gauge of an individual’s resource capacity for coping with stressful job demands (Babakus, Yavas, & Ashill, 2010). Therefore, with the higher P-O fit, employees can have more resource capacity to tackle stresses which lead to higher job satisfaction (Boudreaux, Mandry, & Brantley, 1997). Job stress mediates the relationships between P-O fit and job satisfaction. Our finding integrates the theory of conservation of resources into our understanding of the process linking P-O fit to employee work attitude.

Another important contribution of our findings is the existence of a moderating role of supervisor support in the relationship of P-O fit and job stress, and the indirect effect of P-O fit on job satisfaction through job stress will be stronger for employees who have lower supervisor support. As we know, the concept of P-O fit has received attention from a number of theorists. However, there has been little attention paid to the interaction between P-O fit and supervisor support to such concepts as job satisfaction. Since turnover results from a lack of job satisfaction and turnover causes significant expense to an organization, this interaction has important implications for organizations (Tett & Meyer, 1993). Anything that can be done to increase job satisfaction and reduce turnover will lead to significant benefits to an organization. Those valued things constitute resources including personal resources (e.g., personality characteristics, physical or psychological energies) as well as organizational resources (e.g., employer or boss support, rewards or recognition).Supervisor support is also valuable resources and can serve as direct antidotes to burnout (Lee, & Ashforth,1996). Based on the COR theory, though the moderation direction is not the same as we previously assumed, our finding do shows the important role of supervisors in sincerely helping employees build a good relationship with organization (Sparrowe & Liden, 1997).The study addresses the call for research examining the another black box of the underlying mechanisms and uncovers the moderating effect of supervisor support on the process that P-O fit exerts influence on job stress, illustrating some new mechanisms and boundary conditions between P-O fit and job satisfaction.

Finally, Silverthorne’s P-O fit research results indicate that the degree of P-O fit plays an important role in all of the types of organizational culture studied (Silverthorne, 2004). Our results also indicate that the P-O fit is an important variable within the organizations in non-western cultures. The better the fit, the higher the level of the job satisfaction. The underlying mechanism and conditional effect study between these two variables provides new evidences for improving employees’ job satisfaction in China. Practical Implications

The research explores influencing factors of employees’ satisfaction in a Chinese context from the perspective of individual and organizational interfaces. It indicates the mechanism of how P-O fit impacts job satisfaction. This provides theoretical insight and empirical evidence that organizations can have a positive influence on followers, especially in terms of reducing their job stress and enhancing followers’ satisfaction.

In addition, these results help to underscore and validate the adoption of culture training in a large number of companies. Organizations’ planned training for employees can promote individuals in strengthening learning in all aspects of organization environment, including policy history, proficient work, organizational objectives, values, etc., thus realize more fit between individuals and organizations. More importantly, they can enhance employees’ job satisfaction with low job stress as result.

Leaders garner power, all forms of leadership carry with them the possibility for manipulation and corruption (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004).Such leaders whose

10

standards are poor really function outside the genre of the ideal leadership paradigm. It is also worth mentioning that if organizations want to enhance the relationships between P-O fit and employees’ job satisfaction through supervisor support, supervisors should help employees to solve the real problem they are facing, rather than to meet their own or organizations’ other needs. They should develop a positive form of reciprocation whereby they encourage followers to respond not by serving the leader but by serving others (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004).Otherwise, supervisor support cannot serve as the stress-buffering role and would put additional pressures on employees. There is no doubt that the organizational leadership training should highlight the true sensitivity to the employees’ needs and their developmental opportunities. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research Research Limitations

Despite the promising findings of this paper, there are some limitations associated with the current research that should be addressed in future work. First, the cross-sectional design of the present study did not allow us to determine the direction of causality among the variables.

Moreover, as an enterprises’ actual environment is constantly changing, organizations and their targets are also changing as well. P-O fit is the two-way adaptations and coordination between individual and organization as two entities. Thus the compatibility of both is not static nor remains the same, but is dynamic, and constantly in adjustment. This reinforces the need to understand the inner adaptation mechanisms of individuals and organizations in practice. Thus, we need to consider the influence of P-O fit on job stress across different periods of time. Future Research Directions

A longitudinal design could be employed to provide evidence of causation in future research. Then we can also consider the influence of P-O fit on job stress at different periods of time, such as before or after employees enter organizations. With increasing service and working time, they become more and more familiar with their organizations because of the two-way adaptations and coordination. Future research should examine these possibilities.

Finally, although social psychological theory emphasizes that similar psychological characteristics with other individuals within organizations bring positive work attitudes, and enhances communication and cooperation between members in the early stages of the organizational development, a high degree of homogeneity may lead to the lack of innovation and vigor, and organizations may not respond flexibly to the changing external environment. Therefore, future research also needs to further explore what kind of fit is best for organizational performance outcomes.

11

REFERENCES

Ahsan, N., Abdullah, Z., Fie, D. G., & Alam, S. S. (2009), “A study of job stress on job satisfaction among university staff in Malaysia: Empirical study”, European journal of social sciences, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 121-131.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage. Alloway, R., & Bebbington, P. (1987), “The buffer theory of social support: A review of the

literature”,Psychological medicine, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 91-108. Ambrose, M. L., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2008), “Individual moral development and ethical

climate: The influence of person-organization fit on job attitudes”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 323-333.

Arthur Jr, W., Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., & Doverspike, D. (2006), “The use of person-organization fit in employment decision making: An assessment of its criterion-related validity”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 4, pp. 786.

Babakus, E., Yavas, U., & Ashill, N. J. (2010). Service worker burnout and turnover intentions: Roles of person-job fit, servant leadership, and customer orientation. Services Marketing Quarterly, 32(1), 17-31.

Babin, B. J., & Boles, J. S. (1996),“The effects of perceived co-worker involvement and supervisor support on service provider role stress, performance and job satisfaction”, Journal of retailing, Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 57-75.

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, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1173.

Bedeian, A. G., Ferris, G. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (1992), “Age, tenure, and job satisfaction: A tale of two perspectives”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 33-48.

Beehr, T. A. (1985), “The role of social support in coping with organizational stress”, Human stress and cognition in organizations: An integrated perspective, pp.375-398.

Boudreaux, E., Mandry, C., & Brantley, P. J. (1997). Stress, job satisfaction, coping, and psychological distress among emergency medical technicians. Prehospital and disaster medicine, 12(04), 9-16.

Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002), “The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions”, Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 87 No. 5, pp. 875.

Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1994), “Pay preferences and job search decisions: A person-organization fit perspective”, Personnel psychology, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 317-348.

Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996), “Person-organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry”, Organizational behavior and human decision processes, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 294-311.

Caplan, R.D. (1983), “Person-environment fit: Past, present, and future”, Stress research, Vol. 35, pp. 78.

Caplan, R.D. (1987a), “Person-environment fit in organizations: Theories, facts, and values”, Occupational stress and organizational effectiveness, Vol. 103, pp. 140.

Caplan, R. D. (1987b), “Person-environment fit theory and organizations: Commensurate dimensions, time perspectives, and mechanisms”, Journal of Vocational behavior, Vol. 31No. 3, pp. 248-267.

Chang, E. C., Rand, K. L., & Strunk, D. R. (2000), “Optimism and risk for job burnout among working college students: stress as a mediator”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 255-363.

Chatman, J. A. (1989), “Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person-organization fit”, Academy of management Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 333-349.

Chen, X. P., & Chen, C. C. (2004). On the intricacies of the Chinese guanxi: A process model of

12

guanxi development. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(3), 305-324. Chen, C. C., & Chiu, S. F. (2008), “An integrative model linking supervisor support and

organizational citizenship behavior”,Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 1-2, pp. 1-10.

Cheng, Y., Luh, W. M., & Guo, Y. L. (2003), “Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Job Content Questionnaire in Taiwanese workers”, International journal of behavioral medicine, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 15-30.

Cropanzano, R., Howes, J. C., Grandey, A. A., & Toth, P. (1997), “The relationship of organizational politics and support to work behaviors, attitudes, and stress”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 159-180.

Decker, P. J., & Borgen, F. H. (1993), “Dimensions of work appraisal: Stress, strain, coping, job satisfaction, and negative affectivity”, Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 470.

Edwards, J. R. (1996), “An examination of competing versions of the person-environment fit approach to stress”, Academy of management journal, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 292-339.

Edwards, J. R., & Cooper, C. L. (1990), “The person-environment fit approach to stress: recurring problems and some suggested solutions”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 293-307.

Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Van Harrison, R. (1998), “Person-environment fit theory”. Theories of organizational stress, Vol. 28, pp. 67.

Eisenberger, R.,Stinglhamber, F.,Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002), “Perceived supervisor support: contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention”, Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 87 No. 3, pp. 565.

Erdogan, B., & Enders, J. (2007), “Support from the top: supervisors' perceived organizational support as a moderator of leader-member exchange to satisfaction and performance relationships”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 2, pp. 321.

Farh, J. L., Tsui, A. S., Xin, K., & Cheng, B. S. (1998). The influence of relational demography and guanxi: The Chinese case. Organization Science, 9(4), 471-488.

Finegan, J. E. (2000), “The impact of person and organizational values on organizational commitment”, Journal of occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 73 No. 2, pp. 149-169.

French, J. R., & Caplan, R. D. (1972), “Organizational stress and individual strain”, The failure of success, Vol. 30, pp. 66.

French, J. R., & Kahn, R. L. (1962), “A Programmatic Approach to Studying the Industrial Environment and Mental Health1”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 1-47.

French, J. R., Rodgers, W., & Cobb, S. (1974), “Adjustment as person-environment fit”, Coping and adaptation, pp.316-333.

Gabrenya Jr, W. K., & Hwang, K. K. (1996), “Chinese social interaction: Harmony and hierarchy on the good earth”.

George, J. M. (1992), “The role of personality in organizational life: Issues and evidence”, Journal of Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 185-213.

Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997), “Meta-Analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues”, Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 82 No. 6, pp. 827.

Gray-Stanley, J. A., Muramatsu, N., Heller, T., Hughes, S., Johnson, T. P., & Ramirez-Valles, J. (2010), “Work stress and depression among direct support professionals: the role of work support and locus of control”, Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, Vol. 54 No. 8, pp. 749-761.

Haines, V. A., Hurlbert, J. S., & Zimmer, C. (1991), “Occupational stress, social support, and the buffer hypothesis”, Work and Occupations, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 212-235.

Harrison, R. V. (1985), “The person-environment fit model and the study of job stress”, Human

13

stress and cognition in organizations, Vol. 23, pp. 55. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989), “Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress”,

American psychologist, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 513. Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2006), “A quantitative review of the relationship between person–

organization fit and behavioral outcomes”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 389-399.

Huang, B. (2009), “Impact of job stress on job satisfaction and burnout: A meta-analysis”, Bulletin of Educational Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 439-462.

Hutchison, S., Sowa, D., Eisenberger, R., & Huntington, R. (1986), “Perceived organizational support”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 500-507.

Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2004), “Employees’ goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction”, Academy of management journal, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp.368-384.

Johnson, J. V., & Hall, E. M. (1988), “Job strain, work place social support, and cardiovascular disease: a cross-sectional study of a random sample of the Swedish working population”,American journal of public health, Vol. 78 No. 10, pp. 1336-1342.

Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2002), “Are measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control, and generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core construct? ”, Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 693.

Kaufmann, G. M., & Beehr, T. A. (1986), “Interactions between job stressors and social support: some counterintuitive results”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp.522.

Kearney, E., & Gebert, D. (2009), “Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the promise of transformational leadership”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp.77.

Klassen, R. M., Usher, E. L., & Bong, M. (2010), “Teachers’ collective efficacy, job satisfaction, and job stress in cross-cultural context”, The Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 78 No. 4, pp.464-486.

Kristof, A. L. (1996), “Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications”, Personnel psychology, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp.1-49.

Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005), “consequences of individuals'fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit”,Personnel psychology, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp.281-342.

Kristof-Brown, A.L., and Guay, R.P. (2010), “Person–Environment Fit”, in APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 3), ed. S. Zedeck, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 3-50.

Kottke, J. L., & Sharafinski, C. E. (1988), “Measuring perceived supervisory and organizational support”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp.1075-1079.

Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel psychology, 49(1), 1-49.

Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., Wang, D., & Wang, L. (2000), “Effect of supervisor-subordinate guanxi on supervisory decisions in China: An empirical investigation”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp.751-765.

Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of applied Psychology, 81(2), 123.

Lévi, L., Bartley, M., Marmot, M., Karasek, R., Theorell, T., Siegrist, J. ... & Landsbergis, P. (2000), “Stressors at the workplace: theoretical models”, Occupational Medicine (Philadelphia, Pa.), Vol. 15 No. 1, pp.69.

Li.C.P. (2003). Transformational leadership: dimension, measurement and its mechanism. Doctoral Dissertation, Chinese Academy of Sciences. (in Chinese).

Lin, N. (1986), “Conceptualizing social support”, Social support, life events, and depression, 1730. Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2004), “The effect of organisational culture and leadership style on job

14

satisfaction and organisational commitment: A cross-national comparison”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp.321-338.

Locke, E. A., & Henne, D. (1986), “Work motivation theories”, International review of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 1, pp.1-35.

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001), “Job burnout”, Annual review of psychology, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp.397-422.

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002), “A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects”, Psychological methods, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp.83.

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004), “Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods”, Multivariate behavioral research, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp.99-128.

Mitchell, M. (2007), “Person-organization fit, organizational commitment and intent to leave among nursing leaders”, Nova Southeastern University.

Molm, L. D., Peterson, G., & Takahashi, N. (2001). The value of exchange. Social Forces, 80(1), 159-184.

Morgan-Lopez, A. A., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2006), “Demonstration and evaluation of a method for assessing mediated moderation”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp.77-87.

Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2008), “The ties that bind: Social networks, person-organization value fit, and turnover intention”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp.205-227.

Nadiri, H., & Tanova, C. (2010), “An investigation of the role of justice in turnover intentions, job satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior in hospitality industry”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp.33-41.

Netemeyer, R. G., & Boles, J. S. (1997), “An investigation into the antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviors in a personal selling context”, Journal of marketing, Vol. 61 No. 3.

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, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp.487-516.

Park, H., Monnot, M. J., Jacob, A. C., & Wagner, S. H. (2011), “ Moderators of the relationship between person-job fit and subjective well-being among asian employees”, International Journal Of Stress Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp.67-87. doi:10.1037/a0021854.

Parker, D. F., & DeCotiis, T. A. (1983), “Organizational determinants of job stress”, Organizational behavior and human performance, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp.160-177.

Peng, J., Lee, Y., & Tseng, M. (2014), “Person-organization fit and turnover intention: exploring the mediating effect of work engagement and the moderating effect of demand-ability fit”, The Journal of Nursing Research: JNR, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp.1-11. doi:10.1097/jnr. 00000000000 0 0 019.

Pervin, L. A. (1989), “Persons, situations, interactions: The history of a controversy and a discussion of theoretical models”,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp.350-360.

Posner, B. Z. (1992), “Person-organization values congruence: No support for individual differences as a moderating influence”, Human Relations, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp.351-361.

Resick, C. J., Baltes, B. B., & Shantz, C. W. (2007), “Person-organization fit and work-related attitudes and decisions: Examining interactive effects with job fit and conscientiousness”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92No. 5, pp. 1446.

Ramirez, A. J., Graham, J., Richards, M. A., Gregory, W. M., & Cull, A. (1996), “Mental health of hospital consultants: the effects of stress and satisfaction at work”,The Lancet, Vol. 347 No. 9003, pp.724-728.

Rokeach, M. (1968), “Beliefs, attitudes and values: A theory of organization and change”. Schwarzer, R., & Leppin, A. (1991), “Social support and health: A theoretical and empirical

15

overview”, Journal of social and personal relationships, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp.99-127. Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008), “Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress and

burnout: Mediation analyses”, Applied Psychology, Vol. 57 No. s1, pp.152-171. Seibert, S. E., Crant, J. M., & Kraimer, M. L. (1999), “Proactive personality and career success”,

Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 84 No. 3, pp.416. Shantz, C. A. (2003), “Person-organization fit: Individual differences, socialization, and outcomes”,

(Doctoral dissertation, ProQuest Information & Learning). Sharkawi, S., Rahim, A. R. A., & AzuraDahalan, N. (2013), “Relationship between Person

Organization Fit, Psychological Contract Violation on Counterproductive Work Behaviour”. Vol. 4 No. 4, pp.173-183.

Siegall, M., & McDonald, T. (2004), “Person-organization value congruence, burnout and diversion of resources”. Personnel Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp.291-301.

Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010), “Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects”, Organizational research methods, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp.456-476.

Silverthorne, C. (2004), “The impact of organizational culture and person-organization fit on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwan”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp.592-599.

Silverthorne, C. (2004). The impact of organizational culture and person-organization fit on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwan. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(7), 592-599.

Singh, A., & Ashish, K. (2011), “Role of Stress and Locus of Control in Job Satisfaction among Middle Managers”, IUP Journal Of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp.42-56.

Stone, A. G., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(4), 349-361.

Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel psychology, 46(2), 259-293.

Tsui, A. S., Egan, T., & O'Reilly, C. (1991, August). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 1991, No. 1, pp. 183-187). Academy of Management.

Valentine, S., Greller, M. M., & Richtermeyer, S. B. (2006), “Employee job response as a function of ethical context and perceived organization support”, Journal of Business Research,Vol. 59 No. 5, pp.582-588.

Van Vianen, A. E., Shen, C. T., & Chuang, A. (2011), “Person-organization and person-supervisor fits: Employee commitments in a Chinese context”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp.906-926.

Vancouver, J. B., & Schmitt, N. W. (1991), “An exploratory examination of person-organization fit: Organizational goal congruence”, Personnel psychology, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp.333-352.

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, Vol. 63No. 3, pp.473-489.

Vianen, A. E. (2000). Person-organization fit: The match between newcomers’ and recruiters’ preferences for organizational cultures. Personnel Psychology, 53(1), 113-149.

Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J. I., & Fisher, J. (1999), “The role of social support in the process of work stress: A meta-analysis”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp.314-334.

Wall Jr, J. A. (1990). Managers in the People's Republic of China. The Executive, 19-32. Weiqi, C., & Zhongming, W. (2007), “The Mechanism of the Effect of Person-Job Matching and

Person-Organization Matching on Work Attitudes”, Psychological Science, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp.979. (in Chinese)

16

Werbel, J. D., & Gilliland, S. W. (1999). Person-environment fit in the selection process. Witt, L. A., Hilton, T. F., & Hellman, C. M. (1993). Person-organization fit and job satisfaction: A

social exchange perspective. In annual meeting of the Southwest Academy of Management, New Orleans, LA.

Yichi, Z., Ying, G., & Peng, L. (2005), “Moderating Effects of PO Fit in Turnover Intention Model: A Case of Foreign Pharmaceutical Companies in China”, Nankai Business Review, No. 3, pp.006.

Yukl, G. A., & Heaton, H. (2002). “Leadership in organizations”. Zhong, W. A. N. G., & Lin, Z. H. A. N. G. (2010), “An Empirical Study on Relations among Person-

Organization Fit, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention”, Chinese Journal of Management, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp.379-385. (in Chinese)

17

APPENDIX

Figure 1. Research Model Diagram

Person-organization Fit

Supervisor Support

Job Stress

Job Satisfaction

18

Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations of Research Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Gender 1.667 .472 1 Age 1.573 .723 -.044 1

Education 2.298 1.205 -.095 -.035 1 Tenure 1.898 1.162 .125 .065 -.026 1

Supervisor Support 4.713 .883 -.021 -.098 -.081 -.061 .816 Job Satisfaction 4.051 1.024 .005 -.004 -.259** -.125 .513** .848

Job Stress 3.486 .907 .091 .102 .170* .190** -.243** -.429** .857 P-O Fit 3.914 .814 .055 -.023 -.026 -.014 .383** .422** -.187** .833

Note:N=225 a tenure was measured by the tenure with the current immediate supervisor. ** p＜.01 * p＜.05 (2-tailed). Reliability coefficients appear on the diagonal in bold.

19

Table 2 Outcomes of Hypothesis Testing Model M1（Job Satisfaction） M2（Job Stress）

S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S4 Control Variables

Gender -.001 -.067 .034 .215 .238 .212 .229 Age .045 .043 .067 .056 .057 .050 .045

Education -.184** -.170** -.114* .136** .131** .122* .117*

Tenure -.104 -.091 .067 .122* .117* .107* .104* Independent Variable

P-O Fit .554*** .472*** -.195** -.082 -.609 Mediator Job Stress .423***

Moderator Supervisor Support -.227** -.627*

Interaciton P-O Fit × Supervisor Support .110*

R2 .055* 0.239 *** .359*** .068** .099** .142*** .153*

ΔR2 .055* 0.184*** .120*** .068** .031** .074*** .011* F 3.289* 14.181*** 20.963*** 4.165** 4.964*** 6.220*** 5.772***

Note: ** p＜.01 * p＜.05

20

Figure 2 The Moderation Effect of Supervisor Support (Moderator) between P-O Fit (IV) and Job Stress (DV)

21

Table 3 Outcomes of Mediated Moderation Effect Testing Model Outcome

M3 Job Satisfaction Gender .093

Age .069 Education -.117**

Tenure -.036 P-O Fit -.600*

Supervisor Support -.258 P-O Fit × Supervisor Support .183**

Job Stress -.356** R2 .482*** F 25.961***

Note: ** p＜.01， * p＜.05

22