Kişi ve iş uyumu açısından “Mesleki Uyumluluk Değerlendirmesi” ölçeğinin geliştirme çalışması: Ön çalışma

Abstract

Amaç: Kişi-iş uyumu, çalışanın fiziksel, bilişsel, ruhsal ve çevresel yönlerden işin gereklilikleriyle uyuşmasını ifade eden çok boyutlu bir kavramdır. Bu uyumun doğru değerlendirilmesi, çalışanların iş doyumunu ve örgütsel bağlılığını artırmak ve mesleki rehabilitasyon hedefli programların etkinliğini artırmak açısından kritik önemdedir. Bu çalışmada, Mesleki Uyumluluk Değerlendirmesinin (MUD) geliştirilmesi ve psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmada, “Mesleki Uyumluluk Değerlendirmesi” adıyla yeni bir ölçek geliştirilmiştir. Ölçek, Bilişsel Durum (5 madde), Fiziksel Durum (5 madde), Ruhsal Durum (5 madde) ve Çevresel Durum (15 madde) olmak üzere dört alt boyuttan oluşmaktadır. MUD, farklı sektörlerde çalışan 60 katılımcıya uygulanmış; Cronbach alfa ve madde analizi ile psikometrik özellikleri incelenmiştir. Sonuçlar: Bilişsel Durum, Fiziksel Durum ve Çevresel Durum alt boyutlarında Cronbach alfa değerleri 0,80 üzerindeyken, Ruhsal Durum alt boyutunda 0,765 düzeyinde saptanmıştır. Bazı maddelerde düşük madde-toplam korelasyonları gözlenmişse de alt boyutların iç tutarlılığı yüksek bulunmuştur. Tartışma: MUD, çok boyutlu yaklaşımıyla kişi-iş uyumunu kapsamlı değerlendirme potansiyeline sahiptir. Mevcut pilot bulgular, ölçeğin özellikle mesleki rehabilitasyon ve iş sağlığı alanlarında kullanılabilir bir araç olduğunu düşündürmektedir. Daha geniş ve farklı örneklemlerle doğrulayıcı çalışmalar yapılarak MUD’un geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik profili ayrıntılandırılmalı, böylece ölçeğin kuramsal ve uygulamalı kanıt düzeyi artırılmalıdır.

Keywords

• Mesleki Rehabilitasyon
• Güvenilirlik
• İstihdam
• Psikometri

Development of the “Occupational Fitness Evaluation” Scale From Person-Job Fit Perspective: A Preliminary Study

Abstract

Objective: Person–job fit reflects how an employee’s physical, cognitive, psychological, and environmental qualities align with job demands. Accurate assessment of this fit is crucial for improving job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and the effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation programs. This study aimed to develop the Occupational Fitness Evaluation (OFE) and explore its psychometric properties. Materials and Methods: A new scale, called “Occupational Fitness Evaluation” was developed. It consists of four subscales: Cognitive Status (5 items), Physical Status (5 items), Psychological Status (5 items), and Environmental Status (15 items). OFE was administered to 60 participants from various sectors. Cronbach’s alpha and item-level analyses were performed to examine reliability. Results: Cronbach’s alpha values exceeded 0.80 for Cognitive, Physical, and Environmental subscales, while it was 0.765 for the Psychological subscale. Although several items showed lower item–total correlations, the internal consistency of the subscales were high. Discussion: OFE’s multidimensional approach appears to effectively assess person–job fit. Pilot findings suggest the scale’s potential for use in vocational rehabilitation and occupational health. Future validation with larger and more diverse samples is recommended to refine OFE’s validity and reliability, thus reinforcing its theoretical and practical contributions.

Keywords

• Vocational Rehabilitation
• Reliability
• Employment
• Psychometrics

References

1. Canhete Pereira, R. M., & Monteiro, I. (2020). Vocational rehabilitation and return to work: integrative review. Revista Brasileira de Medicina Do Trabalho, 17(3), 441. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1679443520190350
2. Duncan, K., & Sias, P. M. (2023). “Checking a Box Isn’t Exactly Helpful”: Interpretations of the Voluntary Self-Identification of Disability Form During the Job Application Process. Disability Studies Quarterly, 42(3–4). https://doi.org/10.18061/DSQ.V42I3-4.7997
3. Fadyl, J. K., McPherson, K. M., Schlüter, P. J., & Turner-Stokes, L. (2015). Development of a new tool to evaluate work support needs and guide vocational rehabilitation: the Work-ability Support Scale (WSS). Disability and Rehabilitation, 37(3), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.914586
4. Greguras, G. J., Diefendorff, J. M., Carpenter, J., & Tröster, C. (2014). Person-environment fit and self-determination theory. The Oxford Handbook of Work Engagement, Motivation, and Self-Determination Theory, 143–161.
5. Hennekam, S., Follmer, K., & Beatty, J. E. (2021). The paradox of mental illness and employment: a person-job fit lens. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 32(15), 3244–3271. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.1867618
6. Iwanaga, K., Chan, F., Tansey, T. N., Hoyt, W. T., & Berven, N. L. (2020). Evaluation of Constructs Based on Self-Determination Theory and Self-Efficacy Theory as Predictors of Vocational Rehabilitation Engagement for People With Physical and Sensory Disabilities. Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/0034355220942301, 64(3), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355220942301
7. Jussli, A., Villegas, P. O., & Lippke, S. (2022). Promoting blue-collar employees’ work ability: A qualitative study on occupational health practitioners’ perspective on feasible interventions. Work, 73(2), 591–610. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-205329/ASSET/IMAGES/10.3233_WOR-205329-FIG2.JPG
8. Keane, A., Kwon, K., & Kim, J. (2024). An integrative literature review of person–environment fit and employee engagement. Journal of Management & Organization, 30(6), 2149–2178. https://doi.org/10.1017/JMO.2023.71

9. Leka, S., Jain, A., & Organization, W. H. (2010). Health impact of psychosocial hazards at work: an overview. Memon, M. A., Salleh, R., & Baharom, M. N. R. (2015). Linking person-job fit, person-organization fit, employee engagement and turnover intention: A three-step conceptual model. Asian Social Science, 11(2), 313–320. https://doi.org/10.5539/ASS.V11N2P313
10. Nützi, M., Trezzini, B., Medici, L., & Schwegler, U. (2017). Job matching: An interdisciplinary scoping study with implications for vocational rehabilitation counseling. Rehabilitation Psychology, 62(1), 45.
11. Persch, A. C., Gugiu, P. C., Onate, J. A., & Cleary, D. S. (2015). Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Vocational Fit Assessment (VFA). The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69(6), 6906180080p1-6906180080p8. https://doi.org/10.5014/AJOT.2015.019455
12. Saari, T., Leinonen, M., & Tapanila, K. (2021). Sources of Meaningful Work for Blue-Collar Workers. Social Sciences 2022, Vol. 11, Page 2, 11(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/SOCSCI11010002
13. Schloemer-Jarvis, A., Bader, B., & Böhm, S. A. (2022). The role of human resource practices for including persons with disabilities in the workforce: A systematic literature review. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(1), 45–98.
14. Sekiguchi, T., & Huber, V. L. (2011). The use of person–organization fit and person–job fit information in making selection decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 203–216.
15. Sinclair, J., Gilson, C. B., & Dulas, H. (2023). “I’m Going to Be a Working Person”: Self-Determination in Employment Settings for Adults With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/21651434231186136, 47(3), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/21651434231186136
16. Stansfeld, S., & Candy, B. (2006). Psychosocial work environment and mental health—a meta-analytic review. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 443–462.
17. Taber, K. S. (2018). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11165-016-9602-2/TABLES/1
18. Theorell, T. (1992). Healthy work: Stress, productivity and the reconstruction of working life. Basic Books.
19. Venkatesh, V., Windeler, J. B., Bartol, K. M., & Williamson, I. O. (2017). Person–organization and person–job fit perceptions of new it employees. Mis Quarterly, 41(2), 525–558.
20. Waddell, G. (2006). Is work good for your health and well-being? The Stationary Office.
21. Zhenjing, G., Chupradit, S., Ku, K. Y., Nassani, A. A., & Haffar, M. (2022). Impact of Employees’ Workplace Environment on Employees’ Performance: A Multi-Mediation Model. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 890400. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPUBH.2022.890400/BIBTEX