Do the People Make the Place? A 40-Year Review of Research on ASA Theory

IF 9.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Chad H. Van Iddekinge, Jake T. Harrison, Rong Su, Robert E. Ployhart
{"title":"Do the People Make the Place? A 40-Year Review of Research on ASA Theory","authors":"Chad H. Van Iddekinge, Jake T. Harrison, Rong Su, Robert E. Ployhart","doi":"10.1177/01492063251323858","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) theory proposes that “the people make the place” and has served as a foundation for many areas of organizational research. In this review, we take stock of the ASA literature to identify what we know and what we need to know about ASA processes and their effects on organizations. Based on a review of over 6,000 articles that cited ASA, we identified 321 studies that used the theory as a basis for their hypotheses. However, only 77 (24%) of those studies actually tested an aspect of the theory. For example, although ASA is an organizational-level theory, most studies used the theory to test phenomena at other levels, such as individuals, teams, or occupations. Among studies that did test the theory, very few directly assessed its core hypotheses. For instance, only one published study directly tested the central hypothesis that ASA processes lead to homogeneity. Moreover, some parts of the theory were not supported. As an example, although the theory suggests that ASA processes will reduce organizational effectiveness, several studies found that homogeneity was associated with better performance. Although the amount of empirical support for ASA theory was uneven, we believe it still has the potential to help understand organizations and the people that make them. To that end, we provide an agenda for future research that prioritizes how to best test ASA’s core hypotheses. We also highlight connections between ASA and other theories and literatures that examine similar phenomena to inspire future research opportunities.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251323858","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) theory proposes that “the people make the place” and has served as a foundation for many areas of organizational research. In this review, we take stock of the ASA literature to identify what we know and what we need to know about ASA processes and their effects on organizations. Based on a review of over 6,000 articles that cited ASA, we identified 321 studies that used the theory as a basis for their hypotheses. However, only 77 (24%) of those studies actually tested an aspect of the theory. For example, although ASA is an organizational-level theory, most studies used the theory to test phenomena at other levels, such as individuals, teams, or occupations. Among studies that did test the theory, very few directly assessed its core hypotheses. For instance, only one published study directly tested the central hypothesis that ASA processes lead to homogeneity. Moreover, some parts of the theory were not supported. As an example, although the theory suggests that ASA processes will reduce organizational effectiveness, several studies found that homogeneity was associated with better performance. Although the amount of empirical support for ASA theory was uneven, we believe it still has the potential to help understand organizations and the people that make them. To that end, we provide an agenda for future research that prioritizes how to best test ASA’s core hypotheses. We also highlight connections between ASA and other theories and literatures that examine similar phenomena to inspire future research opportunities.
是人造就了地方吗?ASA理论研究40年回顾
吸引-选择-损耗(ASA)理论提出“人创造场所”,并已成为许多组织研究领域的基础。在这篇综述中,我们对ASA文献进行了盘点,以确定我们对ASA过程及其对组织的影响所知道的和需要知道的。根据对6000多篇引用ASA的文章的回顾,我们确定了321项研究将该理论作为其假设的基础。然而,这些研究中只有77项(24%)真正测试了该理论的一个方面。例如,虽然ASA是一种组织层面的理论,但大多数研究使用该理论来测试其他层面的现象,如个人、团队或职业。在检验这一理论的研究中,很少有直接评估其核心假设的。例如,只有一项已发表的研究直接验证了ASA过程导致同质性的中心假设。此外,该理论的某些部分没有得到支持。例如,虽然理论表明ASA过程会降低组织效率,但一些研究发现,同质性与更好的绩效有关。尽管对ASA理论的实证支持数量参差不齐,但我们相信它仍然有潜力帮助理解组织和组织人员。为此,我们为未来的研究提供了一个议程,优先考虑如何最好地测试ASA的核心假设。我们还强调了ASA与其他研究类似现象的理论和文献之间的联系,以激发未来的研究机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
22.40
自引率
5.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management (JOM) aims to publish rigorous empirical and theoretical research articles that significantly contribute to the field of management. It is particularly interested in papers that have a strong impact on the overall management discipline. JOM also encourages the submission of novel ideas and fresh perspectives on existing research. The journal covers a wide range of areas, including business strategy and policy, organizational behavior, human resource management, organizational theory, entrepreneurship, and research methods. It provides a platform for scholars to present their work on these topics and fosters intellectual discussion and exchange in these areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信