Further clarification on the Hom, Mitchell, Lee, and Griffeth (2012) model: Reply to Bergman, Payne, and Boswell (2012) and Maertz (2012)

Rodger W. Griffeth, Thomas W. Lee, Terence R. Mitchell, Peter Hom

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

In this article, we reply to Bergman, Payne, and Boswell (2012) and Maertz (2012), who commented on our reconceptualization of the employee turnover criterion and proximal withdrawal states (Hom, Mitchell, Lee, & Griffeth, 2012). We agree with some points (e.g., anticipated destinations) but take issue with others (e.g., turnover intentions as the criterion). Nonetheless, our aim is to clarify our integrative formulation about mindsets for organizational participation and withdrawal. In our view, the current process of "article-commentaries-reply" advances our collective understanding of staying and leaving, which is of longstanding interest to scholars in industrial and organizational psychology, organizational behavior, and human resource management.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)871-875
Number of pages5
JournalPsychological bulletin
Volume138
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2012

Keywords

  • Job embeddedness
  • Proximal psychological states
  • Turnover
  • Turnover destinations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Further clarification on the Hom, Mitchell, Lee, and Griffeth (2012) model: Reply to Bergman, Payne, and Boswell (2012) and Maertz (2012)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this