Next Article in Journal
Evaluating Different Soil Amendments as Bioremediation Strategy for Wetland Soil Contaminated by Crude Oil
Previous Article in Journal
Insect Pest Pheromone Lures May Enhance the Activity of Insectivorous Bats in Mediterranean Vineyards and Apple Orchards
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 24
10.3390/su142416567
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Interactive Effects of Person–Group Fit and Team-Member Exchange in Predicting Continuous Improvement

by
Linyuan Zhang
1,
Jee Young Seong
2,* and
Doo-Seung Hong
3
1
Society and Law School, Shandong Women’s University, Jinan 250300, China
2
Department of Business Administration, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju 54896, Republic of Korea
3
Department of Sociology, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(24), 16567; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416567
Submission received: 8 November 2022 / Revised: 8 December 2022 / Accepted: 8 December 2022 / Published: 10 December 2022
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study presents a research model that describes how person–group (PG) fit affects continuous improvement (CI). Using the dyadic survey data from a public sector firm in Korea (N = 113), the study found that the relationships between PG fit and CI are moderated by team boundary conditions such as team-member exchange (TMX). The results revealed that a high level of TMX induces the negative effect of value fit on CI, whereas it strengthens the positive impact of ability fit on CI. Implications for theory, research, and practice are discussed.

1. Introduction

Continuous improvement (CI), i.e., the progressive improvement that involves every employee, has been believed as an appropriate strategy for operating business organizations in harsh environments of constant and pervasive change [1]. Prior research has explored enhancing the implementation level of CI for proper and sufficient utilization by identifying the barriers to CI [2,3]. CI indicates “a culture of sustained improvement targeting the elimination of waste in all systems and processes of an organization” (p. 761) [4]. During the last decade, CI has attracted wide attention in management research despite unsuccessful attempts at CI [2,5,6].
One of the factors affecting CI is person–group (PG) fit, which has potential worth in further research. PG fit is defined as the compatibility or congruence between a person and their group environment, which includes other members and group tasks [7,8]. Ample theoretical and empirical evidence suggests the multiple dimensions of person–group (PG) fit [9,10]. However, topics on PG fit at multiple dimensions are still under-researched. The decision of which dimensions to measure depends on the mechanism of similarity and attraction or social identity and need-fulfillment to be invoked and predicted outcomes. We introduce supplementary and complementary fit to explain the working mechanism of PG fit better. Supplementary fit starts with a person “supplements, embellishes, or possesses characteristics similar to other individuals in this environment” (p. 269) [11]. Alternatively, complementary fit occurs when a “weakness or need of the environment is offset by the strength of the individual, and vice versa” (p. 271) [11]. The common forms of supplementary fit (e.g., values and personality) are strongly associated with affective outcomes, whereas complementary fit (e.g., ability) shows stronger relationships with task performance [12,13].
Recently, Seong and Choi (2021) investigated the interactive effect of PG value and ability fit on creativity at multiple levels [14]. They found that the compensatory effect of value and ability fit predicts employee creativity at the individual level, while the additive effect at the group level affects group creativity. This further emphasizes the necessity and value of studying PG fit in different dimensions. Given that, this article identifies PG value fit and ability fit to improve the incomplete picture of PG fit and validate the mechanism of the relationship between PG fit and CI [15].
Previous research also presented that the context, which refers to “situational opportunities or constraints”, should be incorporated into theoretical models [16,17,18,19]. In contemporary organizations that typically use team-based structures, the social context of the workplace is often composed of a team manager and team members [14,20]. Considering the situations where team members are more likely to contact each other and depend on other co-workers than their leaders [21,22], we develop a moderating model by integrating PG fit and CI with team-member exchange (TMX).
Thus, this study expands earlier research on this topic by focusing on a horizontal relationship with other team members [10,14] and continuous improvement (CI) implementation, consequently leading to company performance [23]. The effect of PG fit on CI is associated with the level of TMX [24]. Previous research has shown that TMX predicts workplace outcomes such as individual performance, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment [25,26,27]. In this vein, TMX has often been introduced as a moderator in explaining the relationship between organizational antecedents and outcomes [14,28,29,30]. The present study contributes to the literature on organizational research by theorizing and empirically verifying a mechanism that explains sub-components of PG fit linked to CI under the boundary conditions of TMX.
Overall, this study aims to explain how and when PG value and ability fit relate to CI. By hypothesizing TMX as a boundary condition moderating the relationship between PG value fit and CI, and PG ability fit and CI, not just a single dimension of PG fit without contextual factors, can fill the gap of the lack of studies addressing multidimensional PG fit and CI research. To specify dimension-dependent impacts of PG fit, we further expound and analyze the intriguing possibility that the interactions between value fit and TMX, and ability fit and TMX, reveal different schemata. This takes a significant step forward in enriching both PG fit and CI literature.

2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

2.1. PG Fit and Continuous Improvement

A CI system is defined as “the interrelated group of planned, organized and systematic processes of constant change across the whole organization, focused on engaging everyone inside the organization into achieving greater business productivity, quality, safety, ergonomics and competitiveness” (p. 1470) [31]. CI has often been posited as an antecedent of organizational outcomes. For example, Robert et al.’s (2000) cross-national study reported that CI practices positively affect job satisfaction. However, since CI has been a less developed subject in human resources (HR) practices over recent decades [32], more research is needed on the antecedents of CI itself. CI is essential for companies to achieve business excellence for surviving in very competitive business environments [4]. Thus, we are concerned with what causes and promotes CI implementation. Regarding the effect of PG fit on CI, Werbel and Johnson (2001) noted that effective use of PG fit will generate more integrated and well-functioning work groups, contributing to HR practices such as CI activities [33].
CI can be pursued at different organizational levels, i.e., at management, group, and individual levels [1,4]. Group-level CI can be found in such activities of quality circles by team members as a circle, in pursuit of finding goals and tactics for problem-solving in their daily work without any interference from management [31]. Therefore, PG fit seems highly associated with CI at individual and group levels.

2.2. The Moderating Role of TMX

According to trait activation theory, we propose that TMX presents a reinforcing social environment in which individuals are hesitant to exert effort to question the organization’s status quo. Since its first introduction to the literature [34], trait activation theory has been widely applied and discussed to explain work autonomy, situation strength, and trait–situation interactions in the workplace [30]. Tett and Guterman (2000) proposed an interactionist principle of trait activation, emphasizing situation–trait relevance [34]. Trait activation theory draws attention to the person–situation interaction to illustrate behavior based on the responses to trait-relevant elements encountered in situations [35].
When TMX is high, workers who are supplementary in values may be less willing to participate in CI because they want to maintain their control and influence over the task. Individual-level value similarity exerts conformity pressure and forces employees to comply with existing rules, norms, and procedures [24]. CI refers to “an organizational ethic encouraging employees’ initiative for learning to improve performance” (p. 645) [36,37]. The positive relationship between ability fit and attitudes is based on a different underlying psychological mechanism. When individuals believe their abilities help complete the environment, they see themselves as contributing something unique and valuable. If they see those abilities as necessary to complete the team’s work, they experience a sense of purposefulness and competence. They share the feeling of being needed by those people rather than simply liking the people they work with. Thus, it is expected that both PG value and ability fit conditions will be associated with CI.
Various conceptualizations of fit may differentially predict specific dependent variables. Supplementary PG value fit indicates a substantial effect on affective outcomes. Conversely, ability fit strongly influences daily on-the-job performance. We propose the differential impact of value and ability fit in predicting CI. Additionally, the relationship between PG fit and CI will differ depending on the level of TMX. Thus, we hypothesize as follows:
Hypothesis 1.
Team-member exchange (TMX) moderates the relationship between PG value fit and continuous improvement (CI), such that the negative relationship is stronger when TMX is high.
Hypothesis 2.
Team-member exchange (TMX) moderates the relationship between PG ability fit and continuous improvement (CI), such that the positive relationship is stronger when TMX is high.
Our research model is presented in Figure 1.

3. Methods

3.1. Data and Sample

Data were collected from a public sector firm in Korea. One hundred and thirteen team members and their team leaders (dyadic sample matching) filled out the questionnaires. The survey was carried out in two stages. At Stage 1, team members were asked to complete the questionnaires loaded on a website. At Stage 2, a month later, team leaders responded to the questions on their team member’s CI attitudes.

3.2. Measures

PG value fit. Adapting the individual-level items used in [38], we constructed a three-item measure (α = 0.97) assessing the degree of congruence in values between team members. The items are: “The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization values”, “My personal values match my organization’s values and culture”, and “My organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life”.
PG ability fit. PG ability fit was also measured using three items (α = 0.98) based on prior research by [38]. The items included: “The match is perfect between the demands of my job and my ability”, “My abilities are a good fit with the requirements of my job”, and “My abilities provide a good match with the demands that my job places on me”.
Team-member exchange (TMX). Team-member exchange was measured using ten items (α = 0.97) from [27]. Sample items are: “I let others know when they affect my work”, “How flexible I am about switching jobs with others”, and “How willing others are to finish work assigned to me”.
Continuous improvement (CI). We measured continuous improvement using three items (α = 0.96) from [39,40]. Sample items include: “This team member is always working to improve the quality of product and work process continuously,” and “This team member makes it routine to make suggestions about how to improve the work procedure.”
Control variables. As for control variables, age, gender, education, team tenure, and rank were used [41]. Age was measured by age in years. Gender was coded 1 for males and 2 for females. Education was coded from (1) high school to (4) graduate school. Rank was coded from 0 (lowest) to 30 (highest). Team tenure was the years of service in the current team.

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 presents the variables’ means, standard deviations, and correlations. The Cronbach’s alpha values for TMX and continuous improvement are shown in parentheses along the diagonal. Mean age of the sample is 40.04 (s.d. = 9.48), and the majority (93.8%) of respondents are males. In addition, 73.5% of the sample finished 4-year college. Team tenure is 11.63 years on average (s.d. = 8.67). Mean score of rank is 5.01 (s.d. = 6.28).

4.2. Hypothesis Testing

We tested the hypotheses using ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. Hypothesis 1 proposed that interaction between PG value fit and TMX predicts CI. Step 3 in Model 3 (Table 2) indicates the negative interaction between PG value fit and TMX (β = −0.27, p < 0.05). The negative relationship between PG value fit and CI is stronger when TMX is high. This supports Hypothesis 1.
Using Aiken and West’s method [42], we graphed the interaction effect in Figure 2. The simple slopes test [43] suggested that at the high level of TMX, the effect of PG value fit on CI was statistically significant (slope = −0.26, t = −1.90, p < 0.05).
In Hypothesis 2, TMX moderates the positive relationship between PG ability fit and CI, such that the relationship would be strengthened when TMX is high. Step 3 in Table 2 indicates a statistically significant interaction between PG ability fit and TMX in predicting CI (β = 0.34, p < 0.01). Figure 3 shows the same interaction pattern as hypothesized. The slope tests indicated that at the high level of TMX, the effect of PG ability fit on CI was statistically significant (slope = 0.27, t = 2.00, p < 0.05). TMX moderated the relationship of PG ability fit and CI, supporting Hypothesis 2.

5. Discussion

5.1. Summary of Findings

Results supported the hypotheses of the effect of TMX on the relationship of PG value and ability fit to CI. This study found that the relationship between PG fit and CI is moderated by team boundary conditions such as TMX. The effect of PG fit on CI depends on the degree of TMX. However, the effects of PG value and ability fit on CI showed reverse patterns. A high level of TMX induces the negative effect of value fit on CI, whereas it strengthens the positive impact of ability fit on CI. Here, we notice that zero-order correlation coefficients of PG value fit and CI, and PG ability fit and CI, were 0.14 and 0.02, respectively, which are not significant at the 5% level because PG value fit and ability fit affect CI in an inverse way, offsetting each other.

5.2. Theoretical Implications

Our findings contribute to research on PG fit and TMX in several ways. First, by linking PG fit and TMX, we explicitly identified a mechanism that explains how to promote or constrain the relationship between PG fit and CI by controlling for TMX. Despite extensive support for a positive relationship between perceived fit and employee attitudes and behavior, such as CI, we need to pay careful attention to the conditions under which PG fit is actually experienced. The company where we collected our data exhibited low between-group variability with high within-group variability, which indicates a high level of homogeneity in the company. High homogeneity may bring about uniform group thinking, which leads to negative outcomes such as a lower level of continuous improvement. Thus, we may have to take both positive and negative effects of similarity or fit into consideration.
Second, we can find some support from the previous research regarding the negative effect of PG value fit on individual outcomes. Researchers have pointed to the negative organizational outcomes of higher levels of person–environment fit [44]. In this respect, our research findings are consistent with the previous research.
Third, our study represents the next stage in a series of studies examining the relationship between PG ability fit, PG value fit perceptions and TMX on employee behavioral outcomes such as CI. There is some consistency in the findings, but also several differences that should be explored to determine when and why fit perceptions may interact differently. By continuing to investigate how fit perceptions interact, we can better identify how they shape attitudes, behaviors, and performance and how to promote better fit perceptions that will benefit employees and their teams.

5.3. Practical Implications

This study also contributes to research on the linkage of PG fit to the role of TMX. From a practical perspective, we may have to explicitly identify and examine a mechanism that explains how promoting the relationship between PG fit, TMX, and CI can be mutually reinforcing. By understanding this relationship from individual and organizational perspectives, we can explain how managers and practitioners of CI programs can concurrently foster both PG fit and its outcomes by managing PG fit in work environments.

5.4. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

Our findings have to be interpreted subject to some limitations. The measurement of fit has to be reexamined in future research. As team members have different inclinations when interpreting their environments, the types of fit measurement should be applied differentially, depending on the purpose of the study. Future research should examine the effects of both perceived and objective fit simultaneously. Future studies should also expand the sample size and collect PG value, ability fit, and continuous improvement at different points in time.
Finally, future research is needed that explores whether other individual differences (e.g., personality, motivation, exchange ideology, etc.) and social characteristics (supervisory/organizational support) also moderate the relationships involving PG value fit, ability fit, and CI, including task-relevant performance. This issue has to be carefully dealt with by examining underlying theories and previous research in depth. This study enriches our understanding of PG fit, TMX, and their effects on CI. Additional research seems warranted and critical to advancing our knowledge about PG fit.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.Y.S.; Methodology, L.Z., J.Y.S. and D.-S.H.; Formal analysis, L.Z., J.Y.S. and D.-S.H.; Investigation, L.Z. and J.Y.S.; Resources, L.Z. and D.-S.H.; Data curation, J.Y.S. and D.-S.H.; Writing—original draft, L.Z., J.Y.S. and D.-S.H.; Writing—review & editing, L.Z., J.Y.S. and D.-S.H.; Supervision, J.Y.S.; Project administration, J.Y.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original data were provided by the corresponding author. If there are relevant research needs, the data can be obtained by sending an email to the corresponding author. Please indicate the purpose of the research and the statement of data confidentiality in the email.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Imai, M. Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success; Random House: New York, NY, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  2. McLean, R.S.; Antony, J.; Dahlgaard, J.J. Failure of continuous improvement initiatives in manufacturing environments: A systematic review of the evidence. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2017, 28, 219–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sanchez-Ruiz, L.; Gomez-Lopez, R.; Blanco, B. Barriers to effectively implementing continuous improvement in Spanish firms. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2020, 31, 1409–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bhuiyan, N.; Baghel, A. An overview of continuous improvement: From the past to the present. Manag. Dec. 2005, 43, 761–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Álvarez-García, J.; Durán-Sánchez, A.; Cruz del Río-Rama, M. Systematic bibliometric analysis on kaizen in scientific journals. TQM J. 2018, 30, 356–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Carnerud, D.; Jaca, C.; Bäckström, I. Kaizen and continuous improvement: Trends and patterns over 30 years. TQM J. 2018, 30, 1754–2731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Kristof-Brown, A.L.; Stevens, C.K. Goal congruence in project teams: Does the fit between members’ personal mastery and performance goal matter? J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86, 1083–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Werbel, J.D.; Gilliland, S.W. Person–environment fit in the selection process. In Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management; Ferris, G.R., Ed.; JAI Press: Stamford, CT, USA, 1999; pp. 209–243. [Google Scholar]
  9. Li, C.S.; Kristof-Brown, A.L.; Nielsen, J.D. Fitting in a group: Theoretical development and validation of the multidimensional perceived person-group fit scale. Pers. Psychol. 2019, 72, 139–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Seong, J.Y.; Kristof-Brown, A.L. Testing multidimensional models of person-group fit. J. Manag. Psychol. 2012, 27, 536–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Muchinsky, P.M.; Monahan, C.J. What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit. J. Voc. Behav. 1987, 31, 268–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Edwards, J.R.; Shipp, A.J. The relationship between person-environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. In Perspectives on Organizational Fit; Ostroff, C., Judge, T.A., Eds.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2007; pp. 209–258. [Google Scholar]
  13. Kristof-Brown, A.L.; Zimmerman, R.D.; Johnson, E.C. Consequences of individuals fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Pers. Psychol. 2005, 58, 281–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Seong, J.Y.; Choi, J.N. Multilevel homology and discontinuity of person–group fit on individual and team creativity. J. Soc. Psychol. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Sung, S.; Seong, J.Y.; Kim, Y. Seeking sustainable development in teams: Towards improving team commitment through person-group fit. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Johns, G. The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2006, 31, 386–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ren, H.; Gray, B.; Harrison, D.A. Triggering faultline effects in teams: The importance of bridging friendship ties and breaching animosity ties. Org. Sci. 2015, 26, 390–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cooper, D.; Patel, P.C.; Thatcher, S.M. It depends: Environmental context and the effects of faultlines on top management team performance. Org. Sci. 2014, 25, 633–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ha, J.-C.; Lee, J.-W.; Seong, J.Y. Sustainable competitive advantage through entrepreneurship, market-oriented culture, and trust. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liao, H.; Liu, D.; Loi, R. Looking at both sides of the social exchange coin: A social cognitive perspective on the joint effects of relationship quality and differentiation on creativity. Acad. Manag. J. 2010, 53, 1090–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hollenbeck, J.R.; Beersma, B.; Schouten, M.E. Beyond team types and taxonomies: A dimensional scaling conceptualization for team description. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2012, 37, 82–106. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lee, K. The joint effects of leader-member exchange and team-member exchange in predicting job crafting. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Jørgensen, F.; Laugen, B.T.; Boer, H. Human resource management for continuous improvement. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2007, 16, 363–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mandel, N. Shifting selves and decision making: The effects of self-construal priming on consumer risk-taking. J. Cons. Res. 2003, 30, 30–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Banks, G.C.; Batchelor, J.H.; Seers, A.; O’Boyle, E.H., Jr.; Pollack, J.M.; Gower, K. What does team–member exchange bring to the party? A meta-analytic review of team and leader social exchange. J. Org. Behav. 2014, 35, 273–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Farh, C.I.C.; Lanaj, K.; Ilies, R. Resource-based contingencies of when team–member exchange helps member performance in teams. Acad. Manag. J. 2017, 60, 1117–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Seers, A. Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making research. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1989, 43, 118–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dierdorff, E.C.; Bell, S.T.; Belohlav, J.A. The power of “we”: Effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time. J. Appl. Psychol. 2011, 96, 247–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Liu, Y.; Loi, R.; Lam, L.W. Linking organizational identification and employee performance in teams: The moderating role of team-member exchange. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2011, 22, 3187–3201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wu, W.; Liu, Y.; Kim, Y.; Gao, P. How does emotional conflict affect innovation behavior? The moderating roles of leader-member exchange and team-member exchange. Inter. J. Conf. Manag. 2018, 29, 327–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Jurburg, D.; Viles, E.; Tanco, M.; Mateo, R. What motivates employees to participate in continuous improvement activities? Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2017, 28, 1469–1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sanchez, L.; Blanco, B. Three decades of continuous improvement. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2014, 25, 986–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Werbel, J.D.; Johnson, D.J. The use of person–group fit for employment selection: A missing link in person–environment fit. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2001, 40, 227–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tett, R.P.; Guterman, H.A. Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. J. Res. Person. 2000, 34, 397–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lievens, F.; Chasteen, C.S.; Day, E.A.; Christiansen, N.D. Large-scale investigation of the role of trait activation theory for understanding assessment center convergent and discriminant validity. J. Appl. Psychol. 2006, 91, 247–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Christopher, R.C.; Probst, T.M.; Martocchio, F.D.; Lawler, J.J. Empowerment and continuous improvement in the United States, Mexico, Poland, and India: Predicting fit on the basis of the dimensions of power distance and individualism. J. Appl. Psychol. 2000, 85, 643–658. [Google Scholar]
  37. Rosow, J.; Zager, R. Training: The Competitive Edge; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  38. Cable, D.M.; DeRue, D.S. The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. J. Appl. Psychol. 2002, 87, 875–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Cammann, C.; Fichman, M.; Jenkins, G.D.; Klesh, J. Assessing Organizational Change: A Guide to Methods, Measures, and Practices; Seashore, S.E., Lawler, E.E., Mirvis, P.H., Cammann, C., Eds.; Wiley-Interscience: New York, NY, USA, 1983; pp. 71–138. [Google Scholar]
  40. Lee, H. The role of competence-based trust and organizational identification in continuous improvement. J. Manag. Psychol. 2004, 19, 623–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Seong, J.Y.; Park, W.W.; Yun, S. The effect of person-environment (organization, supervisor, coworker) fit, on organizational citizenship behavior and performance, and the mediating effect of justice. Korean J. Manag. 2008, 16, 1–62. [Google Scholar]
  42. Aiken, L.S.; West, S.G. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  43. Dawson, J.F.; Richter, A.W. Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: Development and application of slope difference test. J. Appl. Psychol. 2006, 91, 917–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Schneider, B. The people make the place. Pers. Psychol. 1987, 40, 437–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 14 16567 g001 550
Figure 1. Research Model. PG Fit = Person–group fit.
Figure 1. Research Model. PG Fit = Person–group fit.
Sustainability 14 16567 g001
Sustainability 14 16567 g002 550
Figure 2. Interaction between PG value fit and TMX in predicting continuous improvement. Note. PG fit = Person–group fit. TMX = Team-member exchange.
Figure 2. Interaction between PG value fit and TMX in predicting continuous improvement. Note. PG fit = Person–group fit. TMX = Team-member exchange.
Sustainability 14 16567 g002
Sustainability 14 16567 g003 550
Figure 3. Interaction between PG ability fit and TMX in predicting continuous improvement. Note. PG fit = Person–group fit. TMX = Team-member exchange.
Figure 3. Interaction between PG ability fit and TMX in predicting continuous improvement. Note. PG fit = Person–group fit. TMX = Team-member exchange.
Sustainability 14 16567 g003
Table
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations among Study Variables a.
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations among Study Variables a.
VariablesMeanSD123456789
1.Age40.049.47-
2.Gender1.060.24−0.34 **-
3.Education2.650.840.17−0.11-
4.Team tenure11.638.670.68 **−0.18 **−0.04
5.Rank5.016.270.36 **−0.12−0.010.48 **
6.PG value fit5.701.260.150.03−0.110.22 *0.17
7.PG ability fit5.691.150.31 **0.07−0.22 *0.19 *0.170.63 **
8.TMX 5.600.800.080.01−0.170.120.110.49 **0.52 **(0.96)
9.Continuous
Improvement		6.600.51−0.160.07−0.030.03−0.24 **0.140.020.21 *(0.96)
aN = 113. The alpha internal-consistency reliability coefficients appear in parentheses along the main diagonal. TMX = Team-member exchange; PG = Person–group. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 2. Results of Regression Analysis a.
Table 2. Results of Regression Analysis a.
VariablesContinuous Improvement
Model 1Model 2Model 3
Step 1: Controls
   Age−0.35 **−0.35 **−0.32 *
   Gender−0.00−0.00−0.01
   Education0.040.060.06
   Team tenure0.43 **0.41 **0.43 **
   Rank−0.33 **−0.34 **−0.37 ***
Step 2: Main effects
   PG value fit 0.13−0.28
   PG ability fit −0.140.26
   TMX 0.25 *0.27 *
Step 3: Interactive effects
   PG value fit × TMX −0.27 *
   PG ability fit × TMX 0.34 **
Overall F3.28 **3.37 **3.74 ***
R20.150.220.29
R2 change0.15 **0.07 *0.06 *
Notes. N = 113. a Standardized regression coefficients are reported. TMX = Team-member exchange; PG = Person–group. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, L.; Seong, J.Y.; Hong, D.-S. Interactive Effects of Person–Group Fit and Team-Member Exchange in Predicting Continuous Improvement. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16567. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416567

AMA Style

Zhang L, Seong JY, Hong D-S. Interactive Effects of Person–Group Fit and Team-Member Exchange in Predicting Continuous Improvement. Sustainability. 2022; 14(24):16567. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416567

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Linyuan, Jee Young Seong, and Doo-Seung Hong. 2022. "Interactive Effects of Person–Group Fit and Team-Member Exchange in Predicting Continuous Improvement" Sustainability 14, no. 24: 16567. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416567

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop