Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA)

The Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA) is a person-environment fit (P-E fit) theory that focuses on matching employees with employers. This benefits employees by matching them with more satisfying roles, and benefits employers by improving performance and employee retention. According to the Theory of Work Adjustment, employees are most productive when they are happy in their workplace, and are most pleased when their tasks align with their personal values. For this reason, each worker may have a unique set of needs and preferences that must be met in order to for employers to secure maximum performance.

The best measure of the match between an employer and employee is the length of the employee’s tenure at the organization. If at any point an employer becomes dissatisfied with a worker’s ability to complete the tasks necessary for the business to profit, the employer may terminate the relationship. Similarly, if an employer fails to adequately compensate an employee for their work, or fails to provide tasks that the worker finds fulfilling, the employee may terminate the relationship. By thoroughly screening potential employees and employers, the Theory of Work Adjustment may be used to predict the tenure of a worker at a given company.

Background

Most organizations attempt to recruit and select employees who match the demands of their job vacancy. Employees who are properly matched to their job excel at training, work hard, adapt to workplace changes, and remain loyal to the organization. Employees who are badly matched to their organization may provide substandard performance, switch to rival organizations, or even work to sabotage their employer. For this reason, the study of why workers excel in certain circumstances, yet flounder in others, is important for maximizing the potential of an economy.

To navigate and understand this relationship, psychologists began developing person-environment fit (P-E fit) theories, and related person-environment-occupation-performance (PEOP) models. One such psychologist, John Holland, proposed that humans search for work environments that allow them to express their interests. He divided these interests into six types of people: realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional. Realistic people prefer hands-on tasks, investigative people prefer analytical tasks, artistic people prefer creative tasks, social people prefer helpful tasks, enterprising people prefer leadership-oriented tasks, and conventional people prefer rule-oriented tasks. According to Holland’s model, matching a person to their preferred type of work will result in an idealized work environment.

Some early developers of the P-E fit included psychologists Donald G. Paterson, Frank Parsons, and John G. Darley. They developed a model and instruments that would eventually develop into the Theory of Work Adjustment. The theory was fleshed out over time, moving from a simpler trait-and-factor model to a developmentally oriented model during the 1970s. The first theories that could truly be called the Theory of Work Adjustment were written be the psychologists Rene Dawis and Lloyd Lofquist.

Overview

Like other P-E fit theories, the Theory of Work Adjustment is primarily concerned with the relationship between organizations and the workers they employ. When discussing this theory, the term “work” refers to any interaction between a worker and their work environment. When hired by a company, each worker has a unique series of tasks that must be performed in order for the organization to generate profit. Individuals contracted by the work environment bring their skills to the table, some of which may be suited to performing those tasks.

In exchange for the use of those skills, organizations compensate their employees. This compensation may take the form of monetary payments, benefits, or access to facilities. Employees may also be compensated with preferable working conditions, such as flexible work arrangements or increased safety standards.

Both workers and employers have requirements for their partners within this arrangement. Workers may require certain standards be met, such as a minimum amount of pay or healthcare benefits. Employers require that their tasks be completed in a satisfactory matter. In order for the relationship between worker and employer to continue, the standards of both parties must be met. The degree to which those standards are met is called correspondence.

As a worker and employer adjust to one another, they should achieve and maintain correspondence. After training, the employee should learn to meet and adapt to the needs of the employer. Similarly, the employer should learn to best utilize the talents of the employee. As long as correspondence is achieved, the relationship between employer and employee may continue. Should either side fail to meet the other’s standards, the relationship will eventually be terminated. For this reason, the primary measure of correspondence is the length of an employee’s tenure.

The Theory of Work Adjustment attempts to predict an employee’s tenure by measuring the compatibility of an organization with an employee. This is partly predicted by the values of the employee and employer. These values can be grouped into six categories: achievement, comfort, status, altruism, safety, and autonomy. Achievement refers to conditions that encourage accomplishment; comfort refers to conditions that lack stress; status refers to recognition; altruism refers to service to others; safety refers to predictability and stability; and autonomy refers to personal control over work. In many cases, the ability of an employee to perform also plays an important role in correspondence.

Each work environment meets some of the many needs required by workers, but not all. The more needs that an environment meets, the better an employee will tend to perform. Flexibility measures how well an employee deals with conditions that do not match their preferences. Most employees have some degree of flexibility, meaning that they do not demand a perfect job and can perform in a variety of expectations. However, correspondence is often best achieved when employees only have to use a small amount of their flexibility.

Bibliography

Dawis, Rene V., and Lloyd H. Lofquist. Psychological Theory of Work Adjustment. An Individual-Differences Model and Its Applications. U of Minnesota P, 1984.

Greguras, Gary, et al. “Person-Environment Fit and Self-Determination Theory.” The Oxford Handbook of Work Engagement, Motivation, and Self-Determination Theory, 16 Dec. 2013, pp. 143-62, doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199794911.013.002 . Accessed 15 Oct. 2024.

“Theory of Work Adjustment.” University of Minnesota, 2024, vpr.psych.umn.edu/theory-work-adjustment. Accessed 15 Oct. 2024.

Vianen, E.M. “Person-Environment Fit: A Review of Its Basic Tenets.” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, vol. 5, 2018, pp. 75-101, doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104702. Accessed 15 Oct. 2024.

Wang, Kaiqing, and Yijie Wang. “Person-Environment Fit and Employee Creativity: The Moderating Role of Multicultural Experience.” Frontiers in Psychology, 31 Oct. 2018, doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01980. Accessed 15 Oct. 2024.

Winter, David. Theory of Work Adjustment. The Careers Group, University of London, careersintheory.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/theories‗twa.pdf. Accessed 15 Oct. 2024.