Assessing fit in the interview: How candidates consider content and context cues to Person Organization Fit

• Main Author: Kutcher, Eugene James
• Other Authors: Psychology
• Format: Others
• Published: Virginia Tech 2014
• Subjects: Selection Interview; Person Organization Fit; Applicant Reactions
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10919/27655; http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05112007-105712/

The interview is the ideal opportunity for the job candidate to assess his/her fit with a potential employer. While much research from the recruiting literature shows that candidates' perceptions of PO Fit lead to important outcomes such as intentions to pursue a position and acceptance of job offers, fewer studies explore how such fit perceptions are formed. The current study utilized a policy capturing approach to model how individuals interpret and combine cues from the interview experience as they formulate their perceptions of PO Fit. The cues tested included interview question content and the contextual variables of interviewer behavior and interview process factors. College students read a series of interview scenarios where these cues were manipulated, and provided their reactions about PO Fit, as well as about fairness and the ultimate decision to pursue an employment relationship. Although values-related question content was predicted to be most influential in the determination of PO Fit, the contextual factors more strongly affected all outcomes. Furthermore, for many participants, the relationships between these contextual effects and the outcome variable (intention to continue in the selection process) were mediated by perceptions of PO Fit and fairness. Considerable intercorrelation among the three dependent variables was found, and could be attributed to limitations of the method employed or job seekers' generalized and non-focused reactions following interviews. Additional research is needed to further investigate PO Fit perceptions from interview stimuli; suggestions and implications are discussed. === Ph. D.