适合一个人还是适合所有人?适合的规范理论以及适合的规范性和独特性分解

IF 3.1 4区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Journal of Managerial Psychology Pub Date : 2024-03-14 DOI:10.1108/jmp-05-2023-0275
Graham H. Lowman, Peter D. Harms, Dustin Wood
{"title":"适合一个人还是适合所有人?适合的规范理论以及适合的规范性和独特性分解","authors":"Graham H. Lowman, Peter D. Harms, Dustin Wood","doi":"10.1108/jmp-05-2023-0275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Central to the fit concept is that congruence between individual and environmental attributes leads to improved outcomes. However, when discussing fit, researchers often describe congruence as alignment between distinctive or unique individual and environmental attributes. We suggest that current approaches to examining fit do not adequately account for this assumption of distinctiveness because they fail to consider normative expectations and preferences. As such, we propose an alternative theoretical and methodological approach to conceptualizing and measuring fit.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We introduce the normative theory of fit, outline how researchers can decompose fit into distinctive and normative components and identify areas for future research.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Management researchers have largely ignored the importance of decomposing fit into distinctive and normative components. This shortcoming necessitates additional research to ensure a more accurate understanding of fit and its relationship with outcomes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>We provide a clarification and critical examination of a pervasive construct in the field of management by introducing the normative theory of fit, identifying areas where researchers can employ this theoretical lens and suggesting a reevaluation of the importance placed on differentiation that is traditionally employed in practice.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":48247,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Managerial Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fit for one or fit for all? The normative theory of fit and the normative and distinctive decomposition of fit\",\"authors\":\"Graham H. Lowman, Peter D. Harms, Dustin Wood\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jmp-05-2023-0275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>Central to the fit concept is that congruence between individual and environmental attributes leads to improved outcomes. However, when discussing fit, researchers often describe congruence as alignment between distinctive or unique individual and environmental attributes. We suggest that current approaches to examining fit do not adequately account for this assumption of distinctiveness because they fail to consider normative expectations and preferences. As such, we propose an alternative theoretical and methodological approach to conceptualizing and measuring fit.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>We introduce the normative theory of fit, outline how researchers can decompose fit into distinctive and normative components and identify areas for future research.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>Management researchers have largely ignored the importance of decomposing fit into distinctive and normative components. This shortcoming necessitates additional research to ensure a more accurate understanding of fit and its relationship with outcomes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>We provide a clarification and critical examination of a pervasive construct in the field of management by introducing the normative theory of fit, identifying areas where researchers can employ this theoretical lens and suggesting a reevaluation of the importance placed on differentiation that is traditionally employed in practice.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":48247,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Managerial Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Managerial Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-05-2023-0275\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Managerial Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-05-2023-0275","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 "契合 "概念的核心是个人属性与环境属性之间的一致性会带来更好的结果。然而,在讨论 "契合度 "时,研究人员通常将 "契合度 "描述为独特或独特的个人属性与环境属性之间的一致性。我们认为,目前研究契合度的方法没有充分考虑到这种独特性假设,因为它们没有考虑到规范性期望和偏好。因此,我们提出了另一种理论和方法来概念化和测量契合度。我们介绍了契合度的规范理论,概述了研究人员如何将契合度分解为独特和规范两个部分,并确定了未来的研究领域。研究结果管理研究人员在很大程度上忽视了将契合度分解为独特和规范两个部分的重要性。原创性/价值我们通过介绍契合度的规范理论,明确了研究人员可以运用这一理论视角的领域,并建议重新评估传统实践中对差异化的重视程度,从而对管理领域中一个普遍存在的概念进行了澄清和批判性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fit for one or fit for all? The normative theory of fit and the normative and distinctive decomposition of fit

Purpose

Central to the fit concept is that congruence between individual and environmental attributes leads to improved outcomes. However, when discussing fit, researchers often describe congruence as alignment between distinctive or unique individual and environmental attributes. We suggest that current approaches to examining fit do not adequately account for this assumption of distinctiveness because they fail to consider normative expectations and preferences. As such, we propose an alternative theoretical and methodological approach to conceptualizing and measuring fit.

Design/methodology/approach

We introduce the normative theory of fit, outline how researchers can decompose fit into distinctive and normative components and identify areas for future research.

Findings

Management researchers have largely ignored the importance of decomposing fit into distinctive and normative components. This shortcoming necessitates additional research to ensure a more accurate understanding of fit and its relationship with outcomes.

Originality/value

We provide a clarification and critical examination of a pervasive construct in the field of management by introducing the normative theory of fit, identifying areas where researchers can employ this theoretical lens and suggesting a reevaluation of the importance placed on differentiation that is traditionally employed in practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: ■Communication and its influence on action ■Developments in leadership styles ■How managers achieve success ■How work design affects job motivation ■Influences on managerial priorities and time allocation ■Managing conflicts ■The decision-making process in Eastern and Western business cultures
期刊最新文献
Humanizing GenAI at work: bridging the gap between technological innovation and employee engagement From social support to thriving at work via psychological capital: the role of psychosocial safety climate in a weekly study Cognitive capabilities of moral leaders in turbulent environments: a review, theory integration and way forward Unraveling the dynamics: exploring the nexus between abusive supervision, counterproductive work behaviors and the moderating influence of mindfulness Employees’ attitudinal reactions to supervisors’ weekly taking charge behavior: the moderating role of employees’ proactive personality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1