the interaction of personality and job scope in predicting turnover

Journal of Vocational Behavior 15, 78-89 (1979)

The Interaction of Personality and Job Scope in Predicting Turnover

RICHARD T. MOWDAY,* EUGENE F. STONE,-!’ AND LYMAN W. PORTERS

*Unrversrty of Oregon, tf’urdue Unwerslty. and Wnrversity of Callfornra, Irvine

The mteractton of employee personahty characterrsttcs and Job scope in the predtctton of turnover was studted. One hundred and tune indtviduals employed as machme operators (low-scope Job) and scienttfic and technical personnel (htgh- scope Job) wtthm a large manufacturmg orgamzation were the sample No direct relattonshtps were found between personahty charactertsttcs and turnover for the combined sample of employees on high- and low-scope jobs. When correlattonal analyses were carried out wIthinJob scope samples it was evtdent that personahty and job scope interacted m predicting turnover. For employees on htgh-scope Jobs, turnover was negattvely related to the need for achtevement and postttvely related to the need for afftliatton. Turnover was negattvely related to the need for affiliation among employees on low-scopeJobs. The tmplications of these findings for future research on turnover were dtscussed

Theorists have long been cognizant of the need to consider both characteristics of the individual employee and features of the work environment in attempting to explain behavioral phenomena in organizations. Lewin (1951, p. 239), for example, clearly suggested that “the person and his environment have to be considered as one constellation of interdependent factors” in order to fully understand and predict behavior. Investigations of turnover in organizations, however, have most often conceptualized environmental and personal influences as independent sets of predictors (Porter & Steers, 1973). In the relatively few studies where turnover has been viewed as a consequence of the interaction between employee characteristics and features of the work environment, investigators have

This study was supported by funds supphed by the Office of Naval Research, Contracts NOOOl4-69-0200-9001 NR 151-315 and NOOOl4-76-C-0164 NR 170-812

An earlier verston of thts paper was presented at the 20th Annual Conference of the Midwest Academy of Management, Mdwaukee, April 1977

The asststance of George Marker, Les Berkes, Terry Cobb, and BIII Snavely at varrous stages of the mvestigatton and the comments of bchard Steers on an earlier draft were greatly apprectated

Requests for reprmts should be sent to Rrchard T. Mowday, Graduate School of Manage- ment, Umversuy of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403.

78

OOOI-8791/79/040078-12$02.00/O Copynghr @ 1979 by Academic Press. Inc 411 rights of repmductkem ,n any form reserved

PERSONALITY, JOB SCOPE, AND TURNOVER 79

most often focused on such individual attributes as abilities, occupational interests, and initial job expectations (Schneider, 1975).

The importance of considering interactions between employee personality characteristics and the nature of the job is evident from recent research on job design. Studies of the relationship between job scope and job satisfaction have examined the moderating influence of a variety of personal characteristics of the employee (Brief & Aldag, 1975; Hackman & Lawler, 1971; Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Johnson & Stinson, 1976; Stone 1975; 1976; Stone, Mowday, & Porter, 1977; Wanous, 1974). Al- though mixed results have been found both within and between studies, support is generally claimed for the moderating effect of higher-order (growth) need strength on the job sr q-e-job satisfaction relationship. The results suggest that individuals who desire higher-order need satisfaction react more favorably to jobs high in scope (i.e., high variety, autonomy, task identity, and feedback) than individuals who do not desire such need satisfaction. In exploring these relationships, however, few investigators have looked beyond the job satisfaction construct to more behavioral measures of employee reactions to the job such as voluntary turnover.

The purpose of this study was to extend both the turnover and job design literature by examining the extent to which interactions between employee personality characteristics and the nature of the job are related to turnover. Three needs (after Murray, 1938) that appear particularly relevant to the job and work setting were examined in the study: (1) achievement; (2) autonomy; and (3) affiliation. The needs for achievement and autonomy are closely related to the concept of higher-order need strength examined in previous investigations of job design (Steers & Spencer, 1977; Stone et al., 1977). In addition, the need for affiliation is relevant since several studies have noted the importance of opportunities for social interaction in job design (e.g., Hackman & Lawler, 1971).

Following Litwin and Stringer (1968) and previous research on job design (Hackman & Lawler, 1971; Hackman & Oldham, 1976), it was generally predicted that the nature of the job and employee need strengths would interact in employee decisions to remain with or leave the organization. More specifically, it was predicted that employees with high needs for achievement and autonomy would react more favorably to high-scope jobs than employees low in these needs. High-scope jobs are likely to provide greater challenge and opportunities for independence desired by employees high in these needs. In contrast, high-scope jobs may be viewed as overly challenging and as having greater independence than desired by employees with low needs for achievement and autonomy, although it should be recognized that empirical support for a predicted negative relationship between perceived job scope and satisfaction for employees with low growth needs is not strong.

Less theory and research is available to guide predictions concerning the need for affiliation. The increased work demands and independence

80 MOWDAY,STONE,ANDPORTER

inherent on some high-scope jobs, however, may lessen opportunities for social interaction desired by employees with a high need for affiliation. When high-scope jobs are of a highly individualized nature or where work-related social interaction is structured by a project format which specifies relationships for a limited period of time (e.g., as in research and technical jobs), employees with a high need for affiliation may find it difficult to satisfy this need and thus be more likely to leave the organization. Although this may not be the case for all high-scope jobs (e.g., managerial positions in which social interaction is an important part of the job), some support for this reasoning was provided by a recent study by MacEachron (1977) in which satisfaction with co-workers was found to be negatively related to job level.

For low-scope jobs, the opposite predictions were made. Employees with high needs for achievement and autonomy are likely to react less favorably to low-scope jobs than employees low in these needs. Low- scope jobs frequently provide greater opportunities for social interaction (e.g., routine tasks requiring a low degree of concentration to perform the task) and thus may be reacted to more favorably by employees with a high need for affiliation than employees low in this need.

To summarize the predictions made in the study, the needs for achievement and autonomy were expected to be negatively related to turnover for employees on high-scope jobs and positively related to turnover for employees on low-scope jobs. The need for affiliation was predicted to be positively related to turnover for employees on high-scope jobs and negatively related to turnover for employees on low-scope jobs.

This study differs from previous research on job design in that the interaction between job scope and personality was assessed by a withinjob analysis of relationships between employee personality characteristics and turnover for employees sampled from high- and low-scope jobs. In previous research on job design, a between-job analysis has generally been conducted examining the relationship between perceived job scope and job satisfaction for employees with differing need strengths (e.g., high vs low growth need strength). Although these two analytic strategies (between- vs within-job analysis) represent different approaches to view- ing interactions between employee characteristics and the job, they lead to similar predictions. For example, if job scope is positively related to job satisfaction only for employees with high growth need strengths, it fol- lows that employees with high growth needs would react more favorably to high-scope jobs than employees with low growth needs.

Research Setting METHOD

The present study was carrjed out in a large West Coast high- technology firm engaged in research and development and the manufac- ture of a variety of sophisticated electrical and chemical products.


Research Instruments

Personality characteristics. Form A of Jackson’s (1967) Personality Research Form (PRF) was used to measure the strength of employee needs. The development and psychometric properties of the PRF are described in detail by Jackson (1967).

Form A of the PRF measures the strength of 14 needs derived princi- pally from the work of Murray (1938). The needs for achievement, affiliation, and autonomy were examined in this study. Jackson (1967, p. 6) describes individuals with a high need for achievement as aspiring to accomplish difficult tasks, maintaining high work standards, and willing to put forth effort to attain excellence. Individuals with a high need for autonomy are characterized by high self-reliance, independence, self- determination, and a dislike for restraints and restrictions. A high need for affiliation suggests that the individual has a relatively high degree of concern for the formation and maintenance of social relationships. Such individuals are described as making efforts to win friendships and main- tain close associations with their work colleagues.

Each need is measured by 20 items representing statements that an individual may or may not use to describe himself or herself (e.g., “I would like to have a job in which I didn’t have to answer to anyone”). Responses are made on a true-false format.

Perceived job scope. To check on the a priori sampling of high- and low-scope jobs (described below), a 13-item instrument (developed by Stone, 1974) was used to measure employee perceptions of the amount of variety, autonomy, task identity, and feedback associated with theirjobs. An overall measure of job scope was calculated from a unweighted linear combination of standardized job characteristic scores on the four task dimensions.

Demographic characteristics. Study participants provided information on their age, level of educational attainment (measured by 12 categories ranging from “6th grade education or less” to “graduate degree”), tenure in the company (measured in months), tenure in current job (measured in months), sex, and job title.

Jobs Studied

Two jobs within the organization which appeared to the investigators to have high and low amounts of job scope were selected for study. The low-scope job sample was composed of 64 individuals employed as machine operators on assembly-line and continuous process production operations. Although the jobs required a certain amount of skill, the nature of the production processes suggested these tasks would be low in terms of the core dimensions of job scope (i.e., variety, autonomy, task identity, and feedback). In addition, the nature of these jobs suggested that opportunities for social interaction were present. Scientific and tech-

82 MOWDAY, STONE, AND PORTER

nical personnel employed in research and development were selected for the high-scope job sample. A total of 45 employees engaged in engineer- ing, technical, and scientific research jobs made up this latter sample. A majority of the sample were employed as research scientists. The project-oriented and professional nature of research and development suggested these jobs would be high in terms of the core dimensions ofjob scope and relatively low (compared to low-scope jobs) in terms of opportunities for social interaction.

Although the selection of machine operators and scientific personnel as representative of low- and high-scope jobs has a high degree of face valid- ity, the two samples were compared in terms of perceived job scope to determine whether the jobs significantly differed. The standardized mean for overall job scope is presented in Table 1. As predicted, scientific and technical personnel perceived their jobs to be significantly higher in overall job scope than did machine operators (.35 vs - .23, I = 5.7, 108 &, p < .Ol). An examination of the individual job characteristic measures suggests the difference in overall job scope was primarily attributable to differences in the perceived amounts of variety and autonomy associated with the jobs. Differences with respect to task identity and feedback failed to reach significance, although they were in the predicted direction.

The two samples were also compared in terms of demographic characteristics. These means are reported in Table 1. No differences were found in terms of age, sex, tenure in company, or tenure in current job. As might be expected, however, a significant difference was found between the two samples in terms of educational attainment. The average level of education for machine operators was a high-school degree. In contrast, 82% of the scientific and technical personnel held undergraduate or graduate college degrees.

Turnover Data

Turnover data were collected from company records approximately 8 months following the administration of questionnaires. Only individuals who either remained with the company or voluntarily withdrew from the job were included in the analyses. The turnover rates (i.e., percentage of the original sample who voluntarily left the organization) for the two jobs were 9% for machine operators and assemblers (N = 6) and 13% for scientific and technical personnel (N = 6).

Data Collection Procedures

Questionnaires were administered to groups of study participants by the researchers on company premises. Since the time required to complete the entire questionnaire battery was rather long, each respondent completed half the questionnaires on one day and the remaining questions on the following day. The PRF was administered separately in one of the


TABLE 1 Means and Standard Devtattons for Perceived Job Scope, Perceived Job Characteristics,

and Demographtc Characteristics for Employees on High- and Low-Scope Jobs

Measures Low-scope jobs High-scope jobs

Overall job scope”

Demographic Age

Sex (percentage mate)

Tenure m current job”

Tenure in company*

Education

Sample sizes

-.23 .35*

31.1

(99)

97

( .a

37.6

(45.4)

44.7

(49 4)

74

( 1.8)

64

36.2

( 9.1)

.91

( .3)

45 6

(71.5)

53.1

(54 7)

11 o*

( 1.5)

45

Note. A one-tatled t test was used to compare theJob scope means. Two-tailed tests were used in all other comparisons.

’ Job characteristic measures were standardized prtor to calculating job scope b Tenure was measured in months. *p< 01

two sessions. Respondents were randomly assigned to complete either the PRF or other questionnaires during the first administration session. Par- ticipants were asked not to discuss the questionnaires among themselves until all of the administrations had been completed.

Participation in the study was on a voluntary basis. Participants were given information about the genera1 purpose of the study (i.e., “to learn more concerning how people feel about their job”). In addition, they were told that individual questionnaire responses would be held in the strictest confidence. Study participants were asked to indicate their names on the questionnaires so that information collected from the two separate admin-


&rations could be matched. In all but a very few instances, respondents complied with this request.

Data Analysis Procedures

To examine the interaction effects of job scope and personality on employee turnover, subgroup correlational analyses were performed. Given the categorical nature of the “objective” measure of job scope, it was considered more appropriate to correlate personality characteristics with turnover within each of the job scope samples (Saunders, 1956; Zedeck, 1971). In these correlations analyses, staying with the organization was coded 0 and leaving was coded 1. Thus, a positive correlation between a personality characteristic and turnover indicates that individuals with a relatively high need strength were more likely to leave the organization than those with a low need strength.

RESULTS

Zero-order correlations among the measures of personality, objective job scope, and turnover are reported in Table 2. The correlations suggest the personality measures were modestly related to one another. The need for autonomy was found to be significantly related to both the needs for achievement and affiliation. In addition, there was a slight tendency for employees on high-scope jobs to have a higher need for achievement.

The relatively low correlations found between turnover and the needs for achievement, autonomy, and affiliation (cf. Table 2) were of particular interest. For the combined samples of employees on high- and low-scope jobs, no significant relationships were found between the personality traits of employees and their propensity to leave the organization. Hence, there was no direct relationship between employee personality characteristics and turnover.

TABLE 2 Correlations among Measures for Combined Samples

Achievement Affihation Autonomy Job scope” Turnoverb

Achievement Affiliation Autonomy Job scope Turnover

- -.Ol - 21* .26** -.I5 - - 28’* -.02 00

- .Ol .I5 - - .02’

-

Note. N = 109. a High-scope jobs coded 1.0 and low-scope Jobs coded 0.0. b Staying coded 0.0 and leaving coded 1.0. c 4 coefficient. * p < .05.

** p < 01


To assess the interactive effects of job scope and personality on employee turnover, correlations between turnover and each of the personality measures were calculated separately for the high- and low-scope job samples. Partial correlations (specified in Table 3) were calculated to control for intercorrelations among the personality measures and differences between the samples in terms of level of educational attainment. The partial correlations are presented in Table 3.

As the results indicate, the nature of the task had a significant impact on personality-turnover relationships. When correlations were compared between the high- and low-scope job samples, significant differences were found between the correlations of turnover and the needs for achievement (z = 2.24, p < .05) and affiliation (z = 3.14, p < .Ol). No differences were found for the autonomy variable.

For the high-scope job sample, the need for achievement was negatively related to turnover (I = - .41, p < .Ol). In other words, employees with a high need for achievement were more likely than those with a low need for achievement to remain on the jobs high in scope. Turnover and the need for achievement were unrelated for employees on low-scope jobs. Among employees on high-scope jobs, a positive relationship was found between the need for affiliation and turnover (Y = .36,p < .Ol). This indicates that employees with a relatively high need for affiliation were more likely to turn over than those with a low need for affiliation on jobs high in scope. In contrast, turnover was negatively related to the need for affiliation among employees on low-scope jobs (r = -.24, p < .05). For employees on low-scope jobs, then, the higher the need for affiliation the more likely employees were to remain in the organization. No relationships were found between turnover and the need for autonomy among employees on either high- or low-scope jobs.

TABLE 3

Parttal Correlattons between Turnover and Personahty

for High- and Low-Scope Job Samples”

Need strengths Low-scope Jobs High-scope Jobs

Achievement”

Affihationb

Autonomy’

- 01 -.4,c.**

- .24* .36d***

- 02 14

Note. N = 64 for low-scope Job sample and N = 45 for htgh-scope Job sample

n Staymg coded 0.0 and leavmg coded 1 0 b Education and need for autonomy held constant c Difference between correlations sigmficant at p < 05

d Dtfference between correlattons stgmficant at p < 01. e Education and needs for achtevement and affihatron held constant

* p < .05. ** p < .Ol.

86 MOWDAY. STONE. AND PORTER

DISCUSSION

The overall results of the study are consistent with previous research which has found that employee reactions to the job are a result of interactions between employee personality characteristics and the nature of the job. Unlike previous investigations, however, this study sampled employees from high- and low-scope jobs rather than relying solely upon perceptual measures of job characteristics. One limitation of some previous investigations is that questionnaire measures of perceived job characteristics are administered to a sample of employees performing very similar jobs. Thus, it is not always clear whether perceptual differences reflect actual differences in the characteristics of the tasks studied. Fol- lowing a strategy of deliberately setting out to sample high- and low-scope jobs helps insure (but does not guarantee) that jobs will actually differ in their characteristics. Furthermore. employee behavior in terms of staying or leaving over an g-month period was examined instead of attitudinal reactions to the job (e.g., job satisfaction). The design of the study thus provides a somewhat stronger test of predictions in the job redesign literature (e.g., Hachman & Oldham, 1976) than previous studies since common method variance was not as great a concern in the present study as with other investigations, and problems associated with perceptual measures of tasks (e.g., Schwab & Cummings, 1976) were minimized.

The results of this study also help explain the mixed findings resulting from previous investigations of direct relationships between turnover and employee personality characteristics (cf., Mowday. Porter, & Stone. 1978). Based on the predictions and results of the present study, no direct relationships would necessarily be expected between personality and turnover. Rather, the extent to which employees with a given personality characteristic are likely to leave the organization appears to depend upon the characteristics of the job and the immediate work environment. These results suggest the importance of taking environmental factors into ac- count in future studies of relationships between employee personality characteristics and turnover.

Although the results of this study are generally consistent with previous research, several questions are ratsed by the findings. First, contrary to what would be expected on theoretical grounds, turnover was unrelated to the need for achievement among employees on low-scope jobs and the need for autonomy among employees on either low- or high-scope jobs. Confounding the interpretation of this finding, the jobs studied differed significantly in terms of perceived autonomy but not with respect to perceived feedback or task identity (although the differences between jobs on the latter two job characteristics were in the predicted direction). Based on the achievement motivation literature, feedback from the job and the opportunity to do a **whole” piece of work would be expected to


be more relevant in arousing the achievement motive than such job characteristics as skill variety or autonomy. It is difficult to explain why differences were found between jobs in the relationship of turnover to the need for achievement but not the need for autonomy, although it is possible this result is more closely attributable to properties of the perceptual measure ofjob characteristics used to check the sampling ofjobs than actual differences which may have existed in the objective characteristics of the jobs studied.

Second, in comparing the predictions made in this study with previous research on job design, it is important to recognize that the theoretical predictions made concerning the reactions of employee with low needs for achievement and autonomy on high-scope jobs are not entirely consistent with the results of previous studies. The predictions made in this study followed what MacEachron (1977) has termed a “symmetric” model of interactions between employee personality characteristics and the nature of the job. In other words, it was predicted that employees with high need strengths would react more favorably to high-scope jobs and employees with low need strengths would find that such jobs present greater challenge and autonomy than desired and thus would react less favorably (cf., Wanous, 1977). Previous research has generally found that employees with low growth need strengths react in a neutral or slightly positive fashion to high-scope jobs (e.g., Hackman & Lawler, 1971). The existence of an asymmetric interaction would serve to attenuate the correlations found between personality and turnover in the present study.

Third, the results of this study are based on a limited sampling of tasks and a relatively small number of employees who voluntarily terminated their employment. The small number of leavers within each job scope classification probably served to attenuate the relationships under study since it limited variance on the criterion variable. The fact that significant relationships consistent with theory were found despite a lack of variance in staying and leaving suggests that the interactive effects of need strengths and job scope on turnover were relatively strong. The relatively small number of leavers, however, also raises questions about the stabil- ity of these results. Additional research is clearly needed among samples with larger number of leavers before a great deal of faith can be placed in these results.

Finally, in interpreting the results of this study it is important to recognize that the jobs studied may have differed along a number of relevant dimensions in addition to the characteristics of the task. For example, employees on these different jobs may have faced very different job markets that influenced their ability to voluntarily leave their job. In addition, the high- and low-scope jobs may have differed in terms of compensation, opportunities for promotion, supervisory style, and working conditions. No direct measures of potential job mobility of the em-


ployees studied were collected. The study was conducted during a slight recession in the economy brought about by an energy shortage, however, and this may have constrained both scientists and production personnel in their ability to find suitable alternative employment.

It is possible to indirectly assess whether differences in employment conditions influenced the relationships under study by examining single- item measures of employee satisfaction with various facets of the job. When the high- and low-scope job samples were compared in terms of satisfaction with pay, promotions, supervision, and co-workers, no significant differences were found. The two samples did significantly differ in their reported level of satisfaction with working conditions. Such a difference was not unexpected since research and development activities are generally carried out in more pleasant surroundings than is the case with assembly-line and continuous process operations. Satisfaction with working conditions was unrelated to turnover, however, for either the low- (r = - .02) or high-scope job samples (r = - .07). Consequently, this difference between the samples may not have seriously confounded the results.

The overall results of this study support the view that interactions between employee characteristics and the nature of the work environment are an important consideration in turnover. More research is clearly needed to further explore individual-environmental interactions as they influence the decision to stay or leave. In addition to the select personality and job characteristics examined in this investigation, future research attention should be directed toward other relevant individual differences and environmental factors. Such research may be particularly useful if it is longitudinal and focuses on how employees entering the organization with different personal characteristics react to the job. Research is needed that goes beyond testing simple direct relationships between turnover and various employee or job characteristics at a single point in time.

REFERENCES Brtef, A. P , & Aldag, R. J. Employee reacttons to Job charactertsttcs: A constructtve

replicatton. Journal ofApp/led Psychology. 1975, 60, 182-186 Hackman, J. R., & Lawler, E. E Employee reacttons to Job characteristtcs. Journal of

Applied Psychology. 1971, 55, 259-286 Hackman, R , & Oldham, G Motivatton through the destgn of work. Test of a theory

Organizatronal Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 16, 250-279 Jackson, D. N Personality Research Form Manual Goshen, N.Y.: Research Psychologtsts

Press, 1967 Johnson, T. W., & Stinson, J E. Task charactertsttcs, mdtvtdual dtfferences, and Job

sattsfactton. In A Sikula & R. Htlgert (Eds ), Proceedrngs of the 19th Annual Confer- ence of the Mtdwest Divisron of the Academy of Management. St. LOUIS, MO . School of Busmess and Public Administratton, Washington University, 1976.

Lewin, K. Behavtor and development as a functton of the total situation. In D Cartwrtght (Ed.), Field theory In socral scrence. New York Harper Torchbooks, 1951


Litwin, G H., & Stringer, R. A. Morivation and organizatronal climate Cambrtdge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1968.

MacEachron, A. Two interactive perspectives on the relationship between job level and job sattsfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1977, 19, 226-246.

Mowday, R.. Porter, L., & Stone, E. Employee charactertstics as predictors of turnover among female clerical employees in two orgamzattons. Journal of Vocational Eehavror. 1978, 12, 321-332.

Murray, H. A. Explorations in personality. London/New York: Oxford Umv. Press, 1938. Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. Organizattonal, work and personal factors m employee

turnover and absenteetsm Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 151-176 Saunders, D. R. Moderator variables in prediction. Educational and Psychological Mea-

surement, 1956, 16, 209-222. Schneider, B. Orgamzational climate. Individual preferences and organizattonal realities

revistted. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1975, 60, 459-465 Schwab, D. P., & Cummmgs, L. L. A theoretical analysis of the impact of task scope on

employee performance. Academy of Management Review, 1976, 1, 23-35. Steers, R , & Spencer, D. The role of achtevement mottvation m Job design. Journal of

Applied Psychology. 1977, 62, 472-479 Stone, E F. The moderatmg effect of work-related values on the job scope-job satisfaction

relationship. (Doctoral dissertation, Umversity of Califorma, Irvine, 1974.) Dissertation Abstracfs Internationa/. 1974, 35, 3082B. (Umversity Microfilms No. 74-27, 381)

Stone, E. F. Job scope, job sattsfaction, and the Protestant ethic: A study ofenlisted men m the U.S. Navy. Journal of Vocatronal Behavior, 1975, 7, 215-224.

Stone, E. F. The moderating effect of work-related values on the Job scope-job sattsfaction relattonshtp. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 15, 147-167.

Stone, E., Mowday, R., & Porter, L. High-order need strengths as moderators of the job scope-job sattsfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62,466-471.

Wanous, J P. Individual differences and reacttons to Job characteristics Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 616-622.

Wanous, J. P. Who wants job enrtchment? In J. R. Hackman, E E. Lawler, & L W. Porter (Eds.) Perspectives on behavior in organizations. New York: McGraw-Hdl, 1977.

Zedeck, S. Problems with the use of moderator variables. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 76, 295-3 IO.

RECEIVED: August 24, 1978.

the interaction of personality and job scope in predicting turnover

Documents