Whilst we are working on several different avenues, the main thrust of our current efforts is the design, development and testing of an instrument to capture generic fit. This stems from the results of the first stage of the project which yielded a composite map of fit. This composite map contains five domains, which are divided into thirteen subdomains. Our instrument will measure fit across this taxonomy.
To reflect different views on the nature of some of the underlying constructs (such as values), we will be developing both ipsative and normative versions of the instrument. It will have academic rigour for use in research settings and be practical for use in organisational situations so that changes in fit can be tracked over time. In addition, we hope to produce both 'paper and pen' and online versions of the instrument.
In related work we are seeking venues to replicate the original mapping study. Is the composite map specific to the Open University or a higher education setting? Or is the composite map a generalisable taxonomy. If you would be interested in offering your organisation for the site of a replication study, please contact us.
We are currently putting plans together to conduct an empirical study into misfit. Our first stage results suggested to us that person–organisation misfit might exert more influence over behaviour than person–organisation fit. It certainly seems to be a greater concern to managers. We would like to conduct an exploratory study that has the goal of revealing the antecedents and consequences of misfit. Again, if you think you could help us find a suitable site for this project, please contact us.
We are continuing with our theoretical work. One avenue looks at how different approaches to consciousness might theoretically influence our definition of person–organisation fit. We are interested in hearing from anyone with publication expertise in consciousness who would be interested in helping us make progress with our papers.
Perhaps our most controversial line of thinking is a question: Is fit a methodology or a psychological construct? Many of the fit publications employ fit to compare one thing with another. The degree of fit (or misfit) is used to explore psychological relationships. Another way of thinking about 'fit' is that it is psychological construct that influences behaviour. To us, this question splits the literature down the middle and will become an increasingly important concern for researchers.
Finally, are interested in the absence of national culture from the person–organisation fit literature. Hence, we have started thinking about the influence of national cultures on person–organisation fit.