Does person organization fit and person-job fit mediate the relationship between public service motivation and work stress among U.S. federal employees?

Bright, Leonard Article Does person organization fit and person-job fit mediate the relationship between public service motivation and work stress among U.S. federal employees? Administrative Sciences Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Bright, Leonard (2021) : Does person organization fit and person-job fit mediate the relationship between public service motivation and work stress among U.S. federal employees?, Administrative Sciences, ISSN 2076-3387, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 11, Iss. 2, pp. 1-13, https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11020037 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/240129 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ administrative sciences Article Does Person Organization Fit and Person-Job Fit Mediate the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Work Stress among U.S. Federal Employees? Leonard Bright   Citation: Bright, Leonard. 2021. Does Person Organization Fit and Person-Job Fit Mediate the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Work Stress among U.S. Federal Employees? Administrative Sciences 11: 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci11020037 Received: 9 February 2021 Accepted: 31 March 2021 Published: 7 April 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the author. 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/). The Bush School of Government and Public Service, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA; [email protected] Abstract: A plethora of research has extolled the benefits of public service motivation (PSM) in public organizations. However, much less empirical attention has focused on its relationship to work stress. Even though it has been theorized that high levels of PSM causes individuals to be more resilient in stressful public service work environments, empirical research has failed to provide support. Only one study has been conducted which has revealed that high levels of PSM is directly associated with high levels of job stress among public employees, but that its beneficial effects are partially mediated by person-organization (PO) fit. That is, employees with high levels of PSM and high levels of fit to their organizations did not appear to suffer from high stress. This study sought to add to this limited body of research and explore the extent to which person-job (PJ) improves the field’s understanding of the relationships among PSM, PO fit, and work stress. Based on a sample of federal employees in the United States, this study challenged and confirmed the findings of existing research. For instance, PSM had no direct relationship to work stress. However, PSM maintained an indirect relationship to stress through PO fit. The respondents with high levels of PSM reported that they had high levels of fit to their organizations which was associated with significantly lower levels of work stress. Similarly, PSM was not directly related to PJ fit, but was indirectly related through its association with PO fit. PSM was associated with high levels of fit between employees and public organizations, which was subsequently associated with high levels of fit with public service jobs and lower work stress. Above all, this research clarifies the process of how PSM influences work stress among public employees, through PO fit and PJ fit. Keywords: public service motivation; work stress; person-organization fit; person-job fit; public management 1. Introduction The public sector is known for having many of the most stressful occupations in America (Salary.com 2020;Williams 2021). Many public sector jobs place employees on the frontline of pressing social problems that can have high emotional and physical toils. Due to the detrimental effects of stress on the wellbeing of employees, government organizations are in search of strategies that can help alleviate them. One such concept that has shown promise is public service motivation (PSM). PSM is a drive that some individuals have to contribute to the well-being of their community and society. Some have suggested that this drive makes public employees more resilient in high stress work environments (Bakker 2015). Unfortunately, empirical research has not confirmed this hypothesis. Existing research found that PSM was associated with higher levels of stress among public employees, rather than lower levels of stress (Giauque et al. 2013; Gould-Williams et al. 2015; Liu et al. 2015a). On the bright side, one study found that person-organizational (PO) fit partially influence PSM’s relationship to stress ( Gould-Williams et al. 2015 ). In that study, public employees with high levels of PSM were more likely to report being more congruent with the characteristics of their organizations, which subsequently was associated with Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11020037 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/admsci Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 2 of 13 lower work stress. This suggest that outside of PO fit, PSM has detrimental consequences on the perceptions of work stress reported by public employees. However, more research is needed on this topic. Only one study was found in the literature that investigated the relationships among PSM, PO fit, and work stress. As previously mentioned, this study found that PO fit mediated the relationship between PSM and work stress (Gould-Williams et al. 2015). More research on this topic would help confirm this relationship. Additionally, no study has been found that explores this topic from the standpoint of person-job (PJ) fit. Is there a comparative advantage of PJ fit has over PO fit relative to stress? Given that PO fit can be a resource that lowers job stress, to what extent is PJ fit a better or worst predictor among public employees? Answering these questions will help public managers better determine the level of analysis that should be the focus of their human resource recruitment and development strategies. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to re-examine the relationships among PSM, PO fit and work stress, and the impact that PJ fit has on these relationships, using a sample of federal employees who work in a high stress occupation for the Transportation Security Administration. 2. Work Stress and Strain Stress is one of the most researched areas in the general management literature. While there is no universally agreed upon definition of stress, there are several widely used definitions and concepts. For instance, Folkman and Lazarus (1984) states that stress is centered in a relationship between the person and the environment that is appraised by the person as taxing or exceeding their resources and endangering their well-being. Similarly, Johnson and Hall (1988) and Karasek (1979) describe work stress as a function of the relationship between the demands of the work environment and the control, resources, and support that employees have to address those demands. Job demands can be sources of stress, whereas resources and social support are the tools that employees have to meet the work demands. Still more have conceptualized stress as the result of a misfit between the characteristics of individuals and the demands of their work environment (Beehr and Newman 1978;French et al. 1974). The higher the misfit the more stress individuals will experience. Above all, most conceptualizations acknowledge that stress by itself does not automatically lead to aversive outcomes. Stress will become aversive when it leads to a strain, which is a condition that occurs when stress surpasses the available resources, coping strategies, and control available to manage it. Along these same lines, there is also acknowledgement that some stressors are beneficial to the motivation and wellbeing of employees. According to Cavanaugh et al. (2000) challenge stresses are associated with stressful work demands that provide positive feelings and achievement. Whereas hindrance stresses are associated with work related demands that tend to constrain or interfere with an individual’s work achievement. Unlike hindrance stress, challenge stress would produce positive work outcomes, because it does not hinder or interfere with the work efforts or achievement needs of employees, but instead promote personal growth and trigger positive emotions (Crawford et al. 2010). This study focuses on understanding the effects of hindrance stresses in government work environments. 2.1. Sources of Stress in Public Workplaces Public organizations exist in environments of unique sources of stress for its employees. There is a body of research that has explored this topic from the standpoint of various high stress occupations, such as corrections, policing, nursing, firefighters, and other government occupations (Brown and Campbell 1994;Burke 2016;Carpenter et al. 2015; Huckabee 1992;Pendleton et al. 1989;Triplett et al. 1996;West and West 1989). This research confirms that job stress is generally high in many public sector workplaces, even though there is disagreement as to whether public sector workplaces are significantly more stressful than other sectors (Hamann and Foster 2014;Tankha 2006). Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 3 of 13 Nonetheless, there are many sources of stress in the public sector. Public organizations are tasked with some of the most difficult and demanding problems. These problems often expose employees to high physical dangers and emotional burdens. Internally, public organizations are notorious for having unclear goals, and burdensome rules and regulations (Blom 2020;DeHart-Davis and Pandey 2005;Lipsky 2010;Warwick and Meade 1980). Externally, government organizations are immersed in environments of extreme scrutiny and distrust. A powerful element of this environment is the mass media. Some have described the media as an essential ingredient for democracy that provide citizens with information needed to make intelligent demands on government institutions. However, the media is also known for promoting narratives about these institutions that tend to lower the trust level of citizens. According to the (Pew Research Center 2020), only 20% of Americans’ believe that government can be trusted to “do the right thing” always or most of the time. Above all, public sector jobs, and the internal and external characteristics of government organizations have been associated with higher perceptions of stress among public employees (Schaufeli and Peeters 2000;Stevens 2005). Subsequently, the goal of this study is to explore the relationship that PSM has to perceptions of work stress and whether individuals with high levels of PSM cope more effectively with it. 2.2. PSM and Work Stress Public service motivation is an altruistic need that attracts individuals to opportunities to contribute to the wellbeing of their communities and society. To what extent is PSM associated with work stress? Scholars have found that PSM is related to a range of attitudes and behaviors in organizations, such as job satisfaction (Gould-Williams et al. 2015; Homberg et al. 2015;Kim 2012;Liu et al. 2015b;Naff and Crum,1999) and turnover intentions (Bright 2007,2008,2013;Caillier 2015;Christensen and Wright 2011;Gould- Williams et al. 2015;Kim 2012;Quratulain and Khan 2015). However, a much smaller body of research have investigated the relationship between PSM and work stress. Some have hypothesized that PSM is a resource that helps public employees cope with stress and strain (Giauque et al. 2013;Gould-Williams et al. 2015;Liu et al. 2015a). For example, according to Bakker (2015) “Those who are prepared to make sacrifices for the good of society will be better able to deal with organizational stressors because they know that dealing with those stressors serves the higher goal of helping others”. Unfortunately, empirical research has not confirmed this hypothesis. Three studies have concluded that PSM is associated with higher job stress among government employees in Egypt, Switzerland, and China (Giauque et al. 2013;Gould-Williams et al. 2015;Liu et al. 2015a). These findings have been argued to be the result of the fact that PSM raises the performance expectations of employees which subsequently increases their stress levels. Hypothesis 1. PSM will be positively related to work stress. 2.3. PE Fit and Work Stress Person-environment (PE) fit theory is a multidimensional concept that argues that employee behavior is the result of the congruence between the characteristics of the work environments (i.e., goals, demands, and/or resources) and the characteristics of individuals (i.e., values, interest, needs, and/or abilities). PE fit has multiple subtypes with personorganization (PO fit) and person-job (PJ fit) being among the most popular. The concept of fit between the environment and individual characteristics has been operationalized in several ways, such as demands-ability fit, needs-supply fit, or supplementary fit (Kristof 1996) . For instance, from the demands-ability fit perspective, when the demands of the work environment exceed the abilities of the individuals to meet them, a misfit is the result. As previously discussed, misfits can lead to strains which are detrimental to work outcomes. Empirical research has confirmed that PO and PJ fit are distinct concepts that lower work stress and strain (Beehr and Newman 1978;Chilton et al. 2005;Deniz et al. 2015; Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 4 of 13 French et al. 1974; Hecht and Allen 2005;Ivancevich et al. 1982;Kristof-Brown et al. 2005; Kristof 1996). To what extent is PO fit and PJ fit associated with stress in the public sector? Comparatively, which of these sub concepts is the best predictor of stress in public organizations? Only two studies were found that explored the relationships among PO fit, PJ fit, and stress in public sector workplaces and they reached different conclusions. For instance, Gould-Williams et al. (2015) found that PO fit was negatively related to work stress using a convenience sample of professionals from public universities and hospitals in Egypt. However, Giauque et al. (2014) came to the opposite conclusion in a comprehensive study of several PE fit sub concepts, using midlevel hospital employees in Switzerland. Giauque et al. (2014) found that PO fit was not associated with work stress, whereas PJ fit was found to be negatively related. Nonetheless, given the limited amount of research conducted on this topic in the public management literature, the findings of the general literature are more compelling. As a result, PO fit and PJ fit are expected to be associated with lower perceptions of work stress in this study. However, the stresses associated with public service work environments are expected to be primarily experienced through the demands of employees’ formal job positions. In other words, burdensome regulations, negative media coverage, and citizen criticism make it more difficult for public employees to meet the demands of their jobs. As a result, PJ fit is expected to be more strongly associated with work stress when compared to PO fit in this study. Hypothesis 2. PO fit and PJ fit will be negatively related to work stress. 2.4. PSM, PO and PJ Fits, and Stress Considering the association that PO fit and PJ fit may have to work stress, how are these concepts related to PSM? Does PO fit and/or PJ fit mediate the relationship between PSM and work stress? There is a body of research that can help address these questions. Empirical evidence suggests that PSM is positively related to PO fit (Bright 2007,2008; Giauque et al. 2015;Gould-Williams et al. 2015;Jin et al. 2018;Kim 2012;Teo et al. 2016) and PJ fit (Bright 2013;Quratulain and Khan 2015) in public organizations. Public employees with high levels of PSM are significantly more likely to express high levels of fit to the goals of their organizations and the demands of their jobs. Even more, existing research suggest that the relationship PSM has to work stress is partially mediated by PO fit. According to Gould-Williams et al. (2015), even though PSM had a direct positive association with work stress, it also maintained an indirect relationship through PO fit. That is, public employees with high levels of PSM were significantly more likely to have high levels of fit with their organizations, which in turn was negatively related to work stress. While there is no research that was found that explored this issue from the standpoint of PJ fit, a similar outcome is expected. High levels of PJ fit will also mediate the influence that PSM has on work stress. Hypothesis 3. PSM will be positively related to both PO fit and PJ fit. Given the potential association between PSM, and the PO and PJ fit sub-concepts, which sub-concept does PSM best predicts? There are at least two major groups of studies that have directly and indirectly explored this question. The conclusions of these bodies of research are mixed. The first group of studies directly explored the relationship between PSM, PO fit, and PJ fit among public employees, and concluded that PSM was more strongly related to PO fit, than PJ fit (Bright 2013;Van Loon et al. 2017). These findings support Perry and Wise (1990) original hypothesis that the greater an individual’s level of PSM, the more likely they will seek employment in public organizations. However, a second group of studies that comparatively explored the relationship between PSM and the career preferences of students failed to find support for this hypothesis ( Bright 2016 ; Bright and Graham 2015;Christensen and Wright 2011;Rose 2012). PSM was not a predictor of government sector preferences when compared to preferences for careers in Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 5 of 13 the nonprofit sectors (Bright and Graham 2015;Rose 2012) and/or had a very limited relationship (Clerkin and Coggburn 2012). These findings support the argument that PSM is not inherently government specific, but instead attracts students to meaningful public service jobs/work opportunities regardless of the employment sector in which they are held (Light 1999;Perry and Hondeghem 2008). How can both set of studies be correct? Perhaps the answer lies in the types of research subjects used in these studies and their differing socialization experiences. The first group of studies were based on public employees and the second group of studies were based on undergraduate and/or graduate students. This distinction is very important since public employees and students are likely to differ in terms of their socialization experiences which influences their perceptions of fit in government organizations. Public employees tend to have a better understanding of the realities of the public sector which has been gained over the years of their work experience and socialization in public organizations. Students with little to no work experience tend to lack a clear understanding of the benefits of public service careers, are more susceptible to negative messaging about the public sector, and rely on their degree programs to help them sort through the facts to make a career decision. This is especially important in light of the connection that Bright (2018) found between degree orientations, PO fit, and employment preferences. Using a sample of approximately 500 students enrolled in 26 master’s degree programs across the United States, Bright (2018) found that career preferences are related to the orientations of degree programs and their effectiveness in promoting the value of government careers. Degree programs that are more effective in addressing student concerns about the public sector produced students who reported having positive perceptions of their fit in government organizations, which subsequently were associated with a greater likelihood of seeking employment in local, state, or federal levels of government. These findings suggest that PO fit is a product of socialization by way of years of work experience and/or education. As a result, one would expect PSM to be more strongly related to PO fit than PJ fit, especially among employees in the public sector which are the focus of this study. Hypothesis 4. PSM will be more strongly related to PO fit than PJ fit among public sector employees. 3. Method The data for this study was drawn in 2017 from federal employees working for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) within the Department of Homeland Security in the State of Oregon. The survey population were employed at the same occupational classification level, served on the front-line of the agency, and were employed at several locations throughout the State. As front-line employees, their work required direct contact with citizens during the course of their daily work. To stay abreast of the latest rules and regulations that governed their work, all employees were required to undergo monthly recertification training sessions. Agency officials integrated the survey instrument into one of these required training sessions. The employees were provided with a workspace and instructions on how to complete the survey. The survey instructed the employees that their participation in the study was completely voluntary; their individual answers would be kept confidential; they could refuse to answer any question that made them uncomfortable; and that they could end the survey at any time with no penalty or loss. Five-hundred and fifty-seven (N = 557) useable surveys were collected with a response rate of 97%. The study sample was representative of the study population in terms of age, gender, and full-time status. Several major variables were collected in this study: PSM, PO fit, PJ fit, work stress, and demographic characteristics. See Table 1for a description of the variables and coding strategies. PSM was collected using the Kim (2009) 12-item revision of Perry (1996) 24-item PSM scale and had good internal reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha of .843). PO fit and PJ fit Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 6 of 13 were collected using multi-item survey questions and conceptualized in terms of demandsability fit and supplementary fit. For instance, high levels of agreement with the statements that “my job fully utilized my abilities” or that “my values and goals are very similar to the values and goals of my organization” were indicators of high levels of fit to their job and organization, respectively. The survey questions were found to have good internal validity (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.790 and 0.730, respectively) and were summed. For the sake of brevity, work stress was collected using a single-item survey question: How stressful is your job? While multi-item scales are preferred in some cases, empirical evidence suggest that single item survey questions can produce reliable and robust data (Wanous et al. 1997). In addition, several demographic variables (i.e., age, education, gender, minority status, and work experience) were collected and used as control variables. Table 1. Description of study variables. Construct Description/Survey Question Variable Coding Min Max Mean SD Age What year were you born? Year of birth minus Year of study 19 74 41.94 13.1 Education What is the highest level of education you have completed? (1) No College to (5) Masters/Higher 1 5 2.69 0.983 Gender What is your gender? (0) Male; (1) Female 0 1 0.447 0.498 Job Satisfaction How satisfied are you with your current job? (1) Extremely Dissatisfied to (6) Extremely Satisfied 1 6 4.03 1.43 Minority Status How would you describe your racial or ethnic group? (0) Minority; (1) Non-minority 0 1 0.754 0.431 PSM APM Sum PSM items 1, 2, 3 3 18 11.82 2.68 CPI Sum PSM items 4, 5, 6 3 18 13.03 2.55 COM Sum PSM items 7, 8, 9 3 18 12.09 2.54 SS Sum PSM items 12, 13, 14 3 18 12.55 2.73 Work Experience How many years have you worked for the TSA? 0 16 6.74 5.14 Person- Organization Fit (PO) My values and goals are very similar to the values and goals of my organization. (1) Strongly Disagree to (6) Strongly Agree 1 6 4.25 1.234 I feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization. (1) Strongly Disagree to (6) Strongly Agree 1 6 3.80 1.294 What this organizations stand for is important to me. (1) Strongly Disagree to (6) Strongly Agree 1 6 4.87 1.046 Person-Job Fit (PJ) My job fully utilizes my skills and abilities. (1) Strongly Disagree to (6) Strongly Agree 1 6 3.19 1.466 I enjoy my work more than anything else I do. (1) Strongly Disagree to (6) Strongly Agree 1 6 2.85 1.322 How satisfied are you with the meaningfulness of your job? (1) Extremely Dissatisfied to (6) Extremely Satisfied 1 6 4.23 1.382 Work Stress How stressful is your job? (1) Not Stressful at all to (5) Extremely Stressful 1 5 3.13 1.039 The analysis of this study was conducted in three stages. First, a bivariate correlation analysis was conducted to confirm the relationships among the study variables. Any control variables that were not correlated with work stress were removed from subsequent analysis for the purpose of enhancing the power of the study and to maximize parsimony. Second, as shown in Figure 1, as structural equation modeling in AMOS was used to explore the relationships among PSM, PO fit, PJ fit, and work stress. Third, bootstrap analysis will be used to test the significances of any mediation effects found. Statistical significance was set at 0.05, two-tailed. All regression weights are standardized maximum likelihood estimates, unless otherwise noted. Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 7 of 13 Adm. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 14 How satisfied are you with the meaningfulness of your job? (1) Extremely Dissatisfied to (6) Extremely Satisfied 1 6 4.23 1.382 Work Stress How stressful is your job? (1) Not Stressful at all to (5) Extremely Stressful 1 5 3.13 1.039 The analysis of this study was conducted in three stages. First, a bivariate correlation analysis was conducted to confirm the relationships among the study variables. Any control variables that were not correlated with work stress were removed from subsequent analysis for the purpose of enhancing the power of the study and to maximize parsimony. Second, as shown in Figure 1, as structural equation modeling in AMOS was used to explore the relationships among PSM, PO fit, PJ fit, and work stress. Third, bootstrap analysis will be used to test the significances of any mediation effects found. Statistical significance was set at 0.05, two-tailed. All regression weights are standardized maximum likelihood estimates, unless otherwise noted. Figure 1. Study model. 4. Results Table 2 displays the demographic characteristics of the study sample. Most of the respondents were between 18–40 years old (52%), had some to no college experience (53%), were male (55%), identified as White (75%), and gained an average of seven years of work experience in the TSA. As shown in Table 3, work stress was high among the respondents. When asked “how stressful is your job”, nearly two-thirds of the respondents indicated that their jobs were “moderately to extremely” stressful. However, as shown in Table 4, work stress was not significantly correlated with any of the demographic characteristics despite the varying ages, education levels, genders, and years of work experience of the respondents. Similarly, although PO fit and PJ fit were significantly and positively related to work stress, PSM was not directly related. While the respondents with high levels of PSM were more likely to report higher stress than their counterparts with lower levels of PSM, these differences were not statistically significant. These findings are a preliminary indication that PSM’s relationship to stress depends on PO and PJ fit. Table 2. Description of the study respondents. Characteristics N % Age 18 to 30 years old 131 25% 31 to 40 years old 143 27% 41 to 50 years old 90 17% 51+ years old 167 31% Education Level Figure 1. Study model. 4. Results Table 2displays the demographic characteristics of the study sample. Most of the respondents were between 18–40 years old (52%), had some to no college experience (53%), were male (55%), identified as White (75%), and gained an average of seven years of work experience in the TSA. As shown in Table 3, work stress was high among the respondents. When asked “how stressful is your job”, nearly two-thirds of the respondents indicated that their jobs were “moderately to extremely” stressful. However, as shown in Table 4, work stress was not significantly correlated with any of the demographic characteristics despite the varying ages, education levels, genders, and years of work experience of the respondents. Similarly, although PO fit and PJ fit were significantly and positively related to work stress, PSM was not directly related. While the respondents with high levels of PSM were more likely to report higher stress than their counterparts with lower levels of PSM, these differences were not statistically significant. These findings are a preliminary indication that PSM’s relationship to stress depends on PO and PJ fit. Table 2. Description of the study respondents. Characteristics N % Age 18 to 30 years old 131 25% 31 to 40 years old 143 27% 41 to 50 years old 90 17% 51+ years old 167 31% Education Level No College 35 6% Some College 260 47% AA/Technical 122 22% BA 123 22% Masters/Higher 17 3% Gender Male 293 55% Female 237 45% Race and Ethnicity Black/African American 18 3% Hispanic/Latino 22 4% White/Caucasian 399 75% Asian/Pacific Islander 40 8% Native American/ Alaska Native 5 1% Multi-Racial 47 9% Work Experience 1 year and less 130 23% 1 to 5 years 143 26% 5 to 10 years 130 23% 10 years and more 154 28% Adm. Sci. 2021,11, 37 8 of 13 Table 3. Work stress survey results. Survey Question Response Categories How Stressful is your job? Not Stressful at all Slightly Stressful Moderately Stressful Very Stressful Extremely Stressful 6% 20% 40% 23% 11% Table 4. Bivariate correlations among study variables. Construct 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Age 1 2. Education 0.022 1 3. Experience 0.746 ** 0.098 * 1 4. Gender −0.089 * −0.065 −0.189 ** 1 5. Minority Status 0.233 ** −0.023 0.225 ** −0.017 1 6. Stress 0.003 −0.008 −0.028 0.039 −0.066 1 7. PO 0.101 * 0.02 0.107 * 0.091 * 0.107 * −0.174 ** 1 8. PJ 0.078 −0.071 0.029 0.056 0.006 −0.189 ** 0.686 ** 1 9. PSM −0.013 0.055 0.068 −0.049 −0.009 −0.005 0.415 ** 0.317 ** 1 ** = p≤0.001; * = p≤0.05. In order to test the hypotheses and disentangle the relationships among PO fit, PJ fit, and work stress, a SEM was conducted. Since the control variables were not meaningfully correlated with work stress they were removed from further analysis. The results of the SEM analysis are displayed in Table 5and Figure 2. The indices indicate that the study model had a good fit to the data (GFI = 0.998, NFI = 0.996, CFI = 0.998, RMSEA = 0.041). Subsequently, four hypotheses were advanced in this study. The first hypothesis posited that PSM will be positively related to work stress. This hypothesis was rejected. PSM was not meaningfully related to perceptions of work stress in this study. The respondents with high levels of PSM did not report being any more or less stressed in their jobs when compared to their counterparts. The second hypothesis posited that PO fit and PJ fit will be negatively related to work stress. This hypothesis was confirmed. The respondents who reported having high levels of fit to their organization or jobs were significantly more likely to also report having lower levels of stress when compared to their counterparts with lower PO fit and PJ fit. The third hypothesis posited that PSM will be positively related to both PO fit and PJ fit. The findings were mixed. PSM was not found to be meaningfully related to PJ fit, when its relationship to PO fit was considered. However, the respondents with high levels of PSM reported that they had significantly higher levels of PO fit than their counterparts. Hence, the fourth hypothesis that posited that PSM would be more strongly related to PO fit than PJ fit was confirmed by default.