Organizational behavior literature has not typically viewed person-environment (PE) fit as an outcome of organizational change. Although organizations consider PE fit of their employees to be important to the success of both parties, the study of antecedents to individuals fit with their work environment has largely been restricted to the selection and socialization of newcomers. This study investigates effects of several change factors (e.g., the extent of change and how it was managed), as well as the cross-level interaction between the change factors and individual differences (e.g., motivational orientations) on PE fit of individuals who participated in various organizational changes. PE fit was evaluated along three dimensions (Person-Job, Person-Group, Person-Organization). Results show that change is a complex phenomenon and is best understood by interactions between the extent of change, characteristics of the change process, and differences in individuals motivational tendencies. Specifically, the study showed that the fairness of the change process was typically associated with PJ and PO fit, whereas management support for the change generally related to PJ and PG fit. In addition, limited support was found for hypothesized effects of motivational orientations. As expected, Mastery related positively with PE fit, while positive effects of Competitiveness (an externally cued Approach orientation) on PE fit depended on high levels of management support. Surprisingly, it was low Avoid individuals (not high) where the extent of change related negatively with aspects of PE fit. A discussion of the results, as well as limitations and implications of this study, is provided for consideration on future research in this area.

Two concerns dominate speculation about the lack of progress in motivational disposition research. First, truly unique dispositional constructs have not been identified since wide acceptance of the approach / avoidance distinction. Second, research has largely neglected to account for context in models of motivated behavior. Effective avoidance has systematically been unassessed in motivation research. Social cognitive theory was used to define an effective avoidance motivational trait, vigilance, as an antecedent to effective regulatory behaviors that are avoidant in nature and/or strategy. Two studies were conducted: First, development and psychometric evaluation of a scale measuring vigilance within the existing motivational trait framework (Heggestad and Kanfer, 2000). Exploratory and confirmatory analyses provided initial validity evidence for the vigilance construct; composed of diligence and error-detection facets. Convergent – discriminant analysis revealed that vigilance is significantly related to approach and avoidance motivational constructs identifying two possible sources of contamination in self-report measures of motivational traits. Measurement items may be contaminated with implied outcomes and measurement items may be contaminated with generalized self-efficacy. In the second study, a within-subjects experiment tested the predictive validity of the vigilance measurement scale for task-specific self-efficacy and performance on a task that rewards avoidance-oriented strategies. Vigilance predicted prevention task-specific self-efficacy ( = .29) in one of two experimental conditions. The validation study also offered construct validity evidence for the vigilance construct. Implications and future directions are discussed. / Ph. D. / Motivation is defined as the force that energizes, directs, and maintains behavior. Researchers in the field of motivation continuously strive to understand individual differences in motivation levels (e.g., personality traits) and how those individual differences are related to task performance. Current consensus is that individuals differ on their levels of approach-oriented motivation (the motive to approach success) and/or avoidance-oriented motivation (the motive to avoid failure). Researchers tend to treat approach-oriented motivation as “good” and avoidanceoriented motivation as “bad”. The current study argues that, in a variety of contexts, avoidanceoriented motivation is actually good and that it leads to enhanced task performance. Thus, effective aspects of avoidance motivation were identified and used to define a new individual difference trait construct termed “vigilance”. Vigilance is defined as a predisposition for maintaining alertness, meticulousness, fastidiousness, and being heedful of overt warnings or obscure warning signs. Highly vigilant individuals are more likely to engage in careful planning, be good at error detection, and engage in safety-related behaviors. Results of this two-part study indicate that vigilance is a unique motivational trait construct and that it may be related to enhanced performance for some tasks. To the extent that vigilance is a valid motivational trait, it can be used to predict individual’s performance in on various tasks and help ensure that people are entered into jobs that they are likely to excel in. However, support for vigilance was mixed in these studies and further research is required.

Very little empirical evidence exists linking the motivational traits portion of the motivational traits and skills framework to goal setting processes. The present study explored relationships between motivational traits, task-specific self-efficacy and self-set goal level during a computer-based task. Along with direct assessment of these relationships, we assessed whether task-specific self-efficacy mediates relationships between motivational traits and self-set goal level. In the current study, we also examined the ability of motivational traits to provide an increment in the prediction of motivational outcomes over currently accepted goal orientation constructs. Analyses suggest that the motivational traits personal mastery and motivation related to anxiety are consistent predictors of task-specific self-efficacy but inconsistent predictors of self-set goal level while competitive excellence entirely unrelated to motivational outcomes. Motivational traits failed to provide any significant increment in the prediction of task-specific self-efficacy over respective goal orientation constructs. Implications and future directions are discussed. / Master of Science