Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy, Resilience and Job Satisfaction on the Relationship between Person–Organisation Fit and Employee Work Adjustment
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Background
2.1. Employee Work Adjustment
- Adjustment to work refers to the personal ability to express effective working behaviours. Work adjustment includes effort to apply knowledge, abilities, skills or attitudes in work operation. Employees with good work adjustment successfully understand their own duties or responsibilities and are ready to face future challenges [19].
- Adjustment to environment refers to the personal ability to accept company requirements or expectations (Dawis and Lofquist, 1984) and adapt to work contexts or cultures [22]. Ashforth, Saks and Lee [20] stated that environment adjustment includes the ability to accept regulations, structures, communication systems, control, decentralisation and physical conditions in workplaces.
- Adjustment to supervisors refers to the ability to adjust behaviours and work with new supervisors through requesting feedback or opinions helpful for work operation. Jokisaari and Nurmi [23] mentioned that work adjustment of new employees can be expressed both as work performance and social performance, while Nifadkar [24] suggested that adjustment to new supervisors is reflected by relaxed behaviours and openness to receiving friendliness, warmth and advice.
2.2. Person–Organisation Fit
2.3. Self-Efficacy as a Mediating Variable
2.4. Job Satisfaction and Self-Efficacy as Mediating Variables
2.5. Resilience and Self-Efficacy as Mediating Variables
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Model Development and Hypotheses
3.2. Materials and Methods
4. Results
4.1. Sample Characteristics
4.2. Descriptive Statistics
4.3. Direct Effect of POF on EWA
4.4. Research Model Evaluation
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
6.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications
6.2. Research Limitations and Suggestions for Future Study
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Dawis, R.V.; Lofquist, L.H. A Psychological Theory of Work Adjustment: An Individual-Differences Model and Its Applications; University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis, MIN, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Ashfaq, B.; Hamid, A. Person-organization fit and organization citizenship behavior: Modeling the work engagement as a mediator. Asia-Pac. J. Bus. Adm. 2021, 13, 19–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.; Tao, H.; Bowers, B.J.; Brown, R.; Zhang, Y. Influence of social support and self-efficacy on resilience of early career registered nurses. West. J. Nurs. Res. 2017, 40, 648–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Näswall, K.; Malinen, S.; Kuntz, J.; Hodliffe, M. Employee resilience: Development and validation of a measure. J. Manag. Psychol. 2019, 34, 353–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Min, N.; Ki, N.; Yoon, T. Public service motivation, job satisfaction, and the moderating effect of employment sector: A meta-analysis. Int. Rev. Public Adm. 2021, 26, 135–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nolan, E.M.; Morley, M.J. A test of the relationship between person–environment fit and cross-cultural adjustment among self-initiated expatriates. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2014, 25, 1631–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malik, P.; Garg, P. Learning organization and work engagement: The mediating role of employee resilience. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2020, 31, 1071–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.; Lee, K.-H.; Bae, K.-H. Distinguishing motivational traits between person-organization fit and person-job fit: Testing the moderating effects of extrinsic rewards in enhancing public employee job satisfaction. Int. J. Public Adm. 2019, 42, 1040–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacharyya, P.; Jena, L.K.; Pradhan, S. Resilience as a mediator between workplace humour and well-being at work: An enquiry on the healthcare professionals. J. Health Manag. 2019, 21, 160–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernabé, M.; Botia, J.M. Resilience as a mediator in emotional social support’s relationship with occupational psychology health in firefighters. J. Health Psychol. 2016, 21, 1778–1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, M.H.; McDonald, B.; Park, J. Person—Organization fit and turnover intention: Exploring the mediating role of employee followership and job satisfaction through conservation of resources theory. Rev. Public Pers. Adm. 2018, 38, 167–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hesketh, B. Work adjustment. In Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Kittler, M.G.; Rygl, D.; Mackinnon, A.; Wiedemann, K. Work role and work adjustment in emerging markets. Cross Cult. Manag. Int. J. 2011, 18, 165–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, S.E.; Stoermer, S.; Froese, F.J. When the going gets tough: The influence of expatriate resilience and perceived organizational inclusion climate on work adjustment and turnover intentions. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2019, 30, 1393–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yalabik, Z.Y. Mergers and acquisitions: Does organizational socialization matter? Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2013, 16, 519–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thorpe, L.P.; Schmuller, A.M. Personality: An Interdisciplinary Approach; D Van Nostrand Company: New York, NY, USA, 1958. [Google Scholar]
- Peltokorpi, V.; Feng, J.; Pustovit, S.; Allen, D.G.; Rubenstein, A.L. The interactive effects of socialization tactics and work locus of control on newcomer work adjustment, job embeddedness, and voluntary turnover. Hum. Relat. 2020, 75, 177–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrews, H.; Roy, C. Essentials of the Roy Adaptation Model; Appleton-Century-Crofts: New York, NY, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Arkoff, A. Adjustment and Mntal Health; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1968. [Google Scholar]
- Ashforth, B.E.; Saks, A.M.; Lee, R.T. Socialization and newcomer adjustment: The role of organizational context. Hum. Relat. 1998, 51, 897–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dawis, R.V.; England, G.W.; Lofquist, L.H. Theory of Work Adjustment; University of Minnesota: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 1964. [Google Scholar]
- Ward, C.; Rana-Deuba, A. Home and host culture influences on sojourner adjustment. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 2000, 24, 291–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jokisaari, M.; Nurmi, J.-E. Change in newcomers’ supervisor support and socialization outcomes after organizational entry. Acad. Manag. J. 2009, 52, 527–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nifadkar, S. Supervisors’ schemas: Influence on newcomers’ adjustment during organizational socialization. Acad. Manag. Proc. 2018, 2018, 14750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gardner, D.G.; Huang, G.-H.; Pierce, J.L.; Niu, X.; Lee, C. Not just for newcomers: Organizational socialization, employee adjustment and experience, and growth in organization-based self-esteem. In Human Resource Development Quarterly; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Argyris, C. The individual and organization: Some problems of mutual adjustment. Adm. Sci. Q. 1957, 2, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vogel, R.M.; Feldman, D.C. Integrating the levels of person-environment fit: The roles of vocational fit and group fit. J. Vocat. Behav. 2009, 75, 68–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jehanzeb, K. Does perceived organizational support and employee development influence organizational citizenship behavior? Eur. J. Train. Dev. 2020, 44, 637–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhir, S.; Dutta, T. Linking supervisor-support, person-job fit and person-organization fit to company value. J. Indian Bus. Res. 2020, 12, 549–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, J.-C. Effects of person-organization fit objective feedback and subjective perception on organizational attractiveness in online recruitment. Pers. Rev. 2021, 51, 1262–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, H.-M.; Kim, W.G.; McGinley, S. The extension of the theory of person-organization fit toward hospitality migrant worker. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2017, 62, 53–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am. Psychol. 1982, 37, 122–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, P.D.; Bhattacharya, S.; Sheorey, P.; Coelho, P. Relationship between onboarding experience and turnover intention: Intervening role of locus of control and self-efficacy. Ind. Commer. Train. 2018, 50, 61–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashforth, B.E.; Saks, A.M. Personal control in organizations: A longitudinal investigation with newcomers. Hum. Relat. 2000, 53, 311–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maeda, U.; Shen, B.-J.; Schwarz, E.R.; Farrell, K.A.; Mallon, S. Self-efficacy mediates the associations of social support and depression with treatment adherence in heart failure patients. Int. J. Behav. Med. 2013, 20, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Bao, Y.; Liu, L.; Ramos, A.; Wang, Y.; Wang, L. The mediating effect of self-efficacy in the relationship between social support and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms among patients with central system tumors in China: A cross-sectional study. Psycho-Oncol. 2015, 24, 1701–1707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saks, A.M. Longitudinal field investigation of the moderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy on the relationship between training and newcomer adjustment. J. Appl. Psychol. 1995, 80, 211–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mpofu, N.; Smedema, S.M.; Athanasou, J. Work Adjustment and career wellbeing of people with neuromuscular disabilities. In Theory, Research and Dynamics of Career Wellbeing; Potgieter, I., Ferreira, N., Coetzee, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 327–345. [Google Scholar]
- Gopalan, N.; Beutell, N.J.; Middlemiss, W. International students’ academic satisfaction and turnover intentions. Qual. Assur. Educ. 2019, 27, 533–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Froese, F.J.; Peltokorpi, V. Organizational expatriates and self-initiated expatriates: Differences in cross-cultural adjustment and job satisfaction. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2013, 24, 1953–1967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Sangalang, P.J. Work adjustment and job satisfaction of Filipino immigrant employees in Canada. Can. J. Adm. Sci. /Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration 2005, 22, 243–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonasson, C.; Lauring, J.; Selmer, J.; Trembath, J.-L. Job resources and demands for expatriate academics. J. Glob. Mobil. Home Expatr. Manag. Res. 2017, 5, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sokro, E.; Pillay, S.; Bednall, T. The effects of perceived organisational support on expatriate adjustment, assignment completion and job satisfaction. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 2021, 21, 452–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahrari, S.; Roslan, S.; Zaremohzzabieh, Z.; Mohd Rasdi, R.; Abu Samah, A. Relationship between teacher empowerment and job satisfaction: A Meta-Analytic path analysis. Cogent Educ. 2021, 8, 1898737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farooqui, M.S.; Nagendra, A. The impact of person organization fit on job satisfaction and performance of the employees. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 11, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, P.; Sparrow, P.; Cooper, C. The relationship between person-organization fit and job satisfaction. J. Manag. Psychol. 2016, 31, 946–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Büyükyılmaz, O. Relationship between person-organization fit and organizational citizenship behavior: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Int. J. Manag. Adm. 2018, 2, 135–146. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, L.G.E.; Gillespie, N.; Callan, V.J.; Fitzsimmons, T.W.; Paulsen, N. Injunctive and descriptive logics during newcomer socialization: The impact on organizational identification, trustworthiness, and self-efficacy. J. Organ. Behav. 2017, 38, 487–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Judge, T.A.; Bono, J.E. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—Self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—With job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86, 80–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zakariya, Y.F. Effects of school climate and teacher self-efficacy on job satisfaction of mostly STEM teachers: A structural multigroup invariance approach. Int. J. Stem Educ. 2020, 7, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burić, I.; Moè, A. What makes teachers enthusiastic: The interplay of positive affect, self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2020, 89, 103008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Türkoglu, M.E.; Cansoy, R.; Parlar, H. Examining relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Univers. J. Educ. Res. 2017, 5, 765–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bussey, K.; Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychol. Rev. 1999, 106, 676–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grotberg, E.H. A Guide to Promote Resilience in Children: Strengthening the Human Spirit; Bernard Van Lee Foundation: The Hague, The Netherlands, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Tugade, M.M.; Fredrickson, B.L.; Feldman Barrett, L. Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: Examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. J. Personal. 2004, 72, 1161–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kuntz, J.R.C.; Malinen, S.; Näswall, K. Employee resilience: Directions for resilience development. Consult. Psychol. J. Pract. Res. 2017, 69, 223–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, Y.; Mao, C. The Impact of person—Job fit on job satisfaction: The mediator role of self efficacy. Soc. Indic. Res. 2015, 121, 805–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.; Wu, G. Person-Organization Fit Relationship with Innovative Performance of Employees: A Literature Review. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education, Culture and Social Development, Wuhan, China, 20–21 May 2017; pp. 185–189. [Google Scholar]
- Shibin, M.; Wang, Y.; Fan, L. The Mediator Role of Innovative Self-Efficacy between Person-Organization Fit and Innovative Behavior. In Proceedings of the 2016 13th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM), Kunming, China, 24–26 June 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Schwarzer, R.; Warner, L.M. Perceived self-efficacy and its relationship to resilience. In Resilience in Children, Adolescents, and Adults: Translating Research into Practice; Prince-Embury, S., Saklofske, D.H., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narayanan, S.S.; Weng Onn, A.C. The influence of perceived social support and self-efficacy on resilience aong firs year Malaysian students. Kajian Malays. J. Malays. Stud. 2016, 34, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boomsma, A. Nonconvergence, improper solutions, and starting values in LISREL maximum likelihood estimation. Psychometrika 1985, 50, 229–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, A. How to … write and analyse a questionnaire. J. Orthod. 2003, 30, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Resick, C.J.; Baltes, B.B.; Shantz, C.W. Person-organization fit and work-related attitudes and decisions: Examining interactive effects with job fit and conscientiousness. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007, 92, 1446–1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jones, G.R. Socialization tactics, self-efficacy, and newcomers’ adjustments to organizations. Acad. Manag. J. 1986, 29, 262–279. [Google Scholar]
- Echezarraga, A.; Calvete, E.; González-Pinto, A.M.; Las Hayas, C. Resilience dimensions and mental health outcomes in bipolar disorder in a follow-up study. Stress Health 2018, 34, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cammann, C.; Fichman, M.; Jenkins, D.; Klesh, J. Overall job satisfaction. In Taking the Measures of Work: A Guide to Validate Scales for Organizational Research and Diagnosis; Fields, D.L., Ed.; Sage Publications: New Delhi, India, 1983. [Google Scholar]
- Na-Nan, K. Employee work adjustment scale for small and medium-sized enterprises in Thailand. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2019, 36, 1284–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boynton, P.M.; Greenhalgh, T. Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. Bmj 2004, 328, 1312–1315. [Google Scholar]
- Eaden, J.; Mayberry, M.K.; Mayberry, J.F. Questionnaires: The use and abuse of social survey methods in medical research. Postgraduate Medical Journal. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1999, 75, 397–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sousa, V.E.C.; Matson, J.; Dunn Lopez, K. Questionnaire Adapting: Little Changes Mean a Lot. West. J. Nurs. Res. 2016, 39, 1289–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 382–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling; Guilford publications: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. Commentary: Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. MIS Q. 1998, 22, vii–xvi. [Google Scholar]
- Piriyakul, M. Mediators and tests of indirect effect. J. Manag. Dev. Ubonratchatani Rajabhat Univ. 2015, 2, 11–31. [Google Scholar]
- Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S.; Ullman, J.B. Using Multivariate Statistics; Pearson: Boston, MA, USA, 2007; Volume 5. [Google Scholar]
- Shaukat, S.; Vishnumolakala, V.R.; Al Bustami, G. The impact of teachers’ characteristics on their self-efficacy and job satisfaction: A perspective from teachers engaging students with disabilities. J. Res. Spec. Educ. Needs 2019, 19, 68–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Latent Factors/Questions | Standardised Factor Loading | AVE and Composite Reliability |
---|---|---|
POF: 2/df = 0.894, GFI = 0.995, AGFI = 0.984, PGFI = 0.332, RMR = 0.010, RMSEA = 0.000 | ||
POF1 | 0.577 | CR = 0.777 AVE = 0.412 |
POF2 | 0.654 | |
POF3 | 0.738 | |
POF4 | 0.595 | |
POF5 | 0.636 | |
SE: 2/df = 1.566, GFI = 0.990, AGFI = 0.958, PGFI = 0.463, RMR = 0.016 RMSEA = 0.042 | ||
SE1 | 0.618 | CR = 0.831 AVE = 0.383 |
SE2 | 0.641 | |
SE3 | 0.501 | |
SE4 | 0.587 | |
SE5 | 0.649 | |
SE6 | 0.668 | |
SE7 | 0.640 | |
SE8 | 0.633 | |
JS: 2/df = 0.08 GFI = 1.000, AGFI = 0.999, PGFI = 0.167, RMR = 0.003, RMSEA = 0.000 | ||
JS1 | 0.642 | CR = 0.737 AVE = 0.486 |
JS2 | 0.782 | |
JS3 | 0.658 | |
RES: 2/df = 2.076, GFI = 0.989, AGFI = 0.960, PGFI = 0.282, RMR = 0.020, RMSEA = 0.055 | ||
RES1 | 0.583 | CR = 0.811 AVE = 0.307 |
RES2 | 0.566 | |
RES3 | 0.635 | |
RES4 | 0.669 | |
RES5 | 0.431 | |
RES6 | 0.475 | |
RES7 | 0.613 | |
RES8 | 0.325 | |
RES9 | 0.565 | |
RES10 | 0.593 | |
EWA: 2/df = 1.222, GFI = 0.955, AGFI = 0.932, PGFI = 0.636, RMR = 0.024, RMSEA = 0.026 | ||
EWA1 | 0.446 | CR = 0.901 AVE = 0.340 |
EWA2 | 0.531 | |
EWA3 | 0.355 | |
EWA4 | 0.561 | |
EWA5 | 0.513 | |
EWA6 | 0.606 | |
EWA7 | 0.602 | |
EWA8 | 0.617 | |
EWA9 | 0.637 | |
EWA10 | 0.656 | |
EWA11 | 0.655 | |
EWA12 | 0.589 | |
EWA13 | 0.538 | |
EWA14 | 0.572 | |
EWA15 | 0.679 | |
EWA16 | 0.634 | |
EWA17 | 0.587 | |
EWA18 | 0.635 |
Mean | S.D. | POF | SE | JS | RES | EWA | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
POF | 3.81 | 0.55 | 1 | ||||
SE | 3.83 | 0.51 | 0.613 ** | 1 | |||
JS | 3.86 | 0.60 | 0.526 ** | 0.652 ** | 1 | ||
RES | 3.82 | 0.48 | 0.670 ** | 0.689 ** | 0.546 ** | 1 | |
EWA | 3.85 | 0.48 | 0.695 ** | 0.671 ** | 0.581 ** | 0.669 ** | 1 |
Total and Indirect Path | Effect | SE | t | 95% CI | Hypotheses | Results | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LL | UL | ||||||
Total | 0.305 | 0.041 | 7.439 | 0.275 | 0.432 | H1 | Accept |
POF > SE > EWA | 0.139 | 0.037 | 3.757 | 0.073 | 0.215 | H2 | Accept |
POF > JS > EWA | 0.028 | 0.014 | 2.000 | 0.006 | 0.058 | H3 | Accept |
POF > SE > JS > EWA | 0.045 | 0.016 | 2.813 | 0.015 | 0.077 | H4 | Accept |
POF > RES > EWA | 0.082 | 0.024 | 3.417 | 0.038 | 0.134 | H5 | Accept |
POF > SE > RES > EWA | 0.056 | 0.016 | 3.500 | 0.028 | 0.092 | H6 | Accept |
Hypotheses (Paths) | Supporting Evidence | Existing Study |
---|---|---|
H1: POF has a direct effect on EWA | Most employees seek jobs with companies that have values, cultures and goals similar to their own to effectively realise their true potential. Companies also seek employees with acceptable characteristics or attitudes similar to existing corporate goals, values, cultures or practical guidelines [9,10,11]. | POF has a significant and direct effect on EWA at β = 0.350, p < 0.05 and CI = [0.275, 0.432]. |
H2: SE is a mediating variable between POF and EWA | Employees with high SE have more self-confidence, and this promotes adaptability to face challenges [12,13,14,15]. | SE has a significant mediating effect between POF and EWA at β = 0.139, p < 0.05 and CI = [0.073, 0.215]. |
H3: JS is a mediating variable between POF and EWA | JS represents positive perception towards work environments and responsibilities; therefore, new employees with JS can adapt more quickly and effectively [16,17,18,19]. | JS has a significant mediating effect between POF and EWA at β = 0.028, p < 0.05 and CI = [0.006, 0.058]. |
H4: SE and JS are mediating chain variables between POF and EWA | Highly perceived SE leads to high JS by increasing self-confidence and readiness to adapt to related contexts or conditions [20,21,22,23,24]. | SE and JS have significant mediating effects as chain variables between POF and EWA at β = 0.045, p < 0.05 and CI = [0.015, 0.077]. |
H5: RES is a mediating variable between POF and EWA | Employees with high RES have the ability to overcome different situations in the workplace [25] and can more readily adjust their behaviour to use the available resources effectively [25,26,27,28]. | RES has a significant mediating effect between POF and EWA at β = 0.082, p < 0.05 and CI = [0.038, 0.134]. |
H6: SE and RES are mediating chain variables between POF and EWA | Employees with high SE show RES to perform difficult and challenging tasks confidently and on time. They also have the patience and ability to cope with different challenges [13,14,15,29,30,31,32,33]. | SE and RES have significant mediating effects as chain variables between POF and EWA at β = 0.056, p < 0.05 and CI = [0.028, 0.092]. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wongsuwan, N.; Na-Nan, K. Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy, Resilience and Job Satisfaction on the Relationship between Person–Organisation Fit and Employee Work Adjustment. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811787
Wongsuwan N, Na-Nan K. Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy, Resilience and Job Satisfaction on the Relationship between Person–Organisation Fit and Employee Work Adjustment. Sustainability. 2022; 14(18):11787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811787
Chicago/Turabian StyleWongsuwan, Natthaya, and Khahan Na-Nan. 2022. "Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy, Resilience and Job Satisfaction on the Relationship between Person–Organisation Fit and Employee Work Adjustment" Sustainability 14, no. 18: 11787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811787
APA StyleWongsuwan, N., & Na-Nan, K. (2022). Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy, Resilience and Job Satisfaction on the Relationship between Person–Organisation Fit and Employee Work Adjustment. Sustainability, 14(18), 11787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811787