MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

"Predicting Voluntary Turnover with Culture, Employee Values and Their Congruence"

2013· article· en· W2019924596 on OpenAlexaff
Derek S. Chapman, David Mayers

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnoverJob satisfactionPsychologyCongruence (geometry)Turnover intentionSocial psychologyLogistic regressionVariance (accounting)Demographic economicsBusinessStatisticsManagementMathematicsEconomicsAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A one year longitudinal study of 477 part time employees from hundreds of companies was conducted to examine the potential of P-O fit to predict voluntary turnover. Employees completed fit measures, perceived fit, job satisfaction, affective commitment, turnover intentions and job search at time 1 and 136 provided data one year later on voluntary turnover. After accounting for the 30% of the turnover due to employee shocks, our results indicated that congruence between personal values and organizational culture at time 1 as well as main effects of company culture and individual values was a strong predictor of voluntary turnover with 69% of the variance in Voluntary Turnover accounted for. Logistic regression provided classification estimates that predicted leavers versus stayers 83% of the time. Results indicate that P-O Fit effects on voluntary turnover were best described directly than through a mediated model involving perceived fit, job satisfaction and job search behaviours. Implications for the use of fit in personnel selection are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207