Abstract
Background
High-level talents in medical and health professions (HLT-MHP) are essential for the sustainable development of healthcare. However, the industry persistently faces a talent shortage, such as inadequate talent development and difficulty in reflecting the value of talent. Focusing on the career success of HLT-MHP and investigating the factors that influence it can provide a significant reference point for the cultivation and development of talent within the healthcare sector. This study aims to describe the current state of calling, person–organization fit, and career success among HLT-MHP; investigate the relationships between these three factors; and ascertain the mediating role of calling between career success and person–organization fit.
Methods
In this study, 391 HLT-MHP from 125 medical institutions, 5 universities, and 1 research institute in Hunan Province, China were selected by convenience sampling from April to June 2024. The participants were surveyed using a general information questionnaire, a person–organization fit scale, a calling scale, and a career success scale. The relationships between person–organization fit, calling, and career success were explored. Additionally, the mediating role of calling between person–organization fit and career success was examined using SPSS 25.0.
Results
The average total scores for person–organization fit, calling, and career success were 36.47 (SD 5.15), 49.73 (SD 6.78), and 41.27 (SD 6.98), respectively, all of which were at a moderately high level. Person–organization fit (r = 0.660, P < 0.001) and calling (r = 0.577, P < 0.001) were positively correlated with career success. Bootstrap test results showed that the mediating effect of calling on person–organization fit and career success was 0.129 [95% CI (0.036–0.217), P < 0.001], accounting for 22.05% of the total effect value.
Conclusions
The person–organization fit of HLT-MHP is indirectly associated with career success through calling. Pertinent managers are advised to focus on the interaction between the three factors; enhance the working environment; establish a secure, effective, and harmonious workplace; increase employee support; recognize potential hires; meet their work needs; and assist them in succeeding.
Keywords: Medical and health profession, High-level talent, Person–organization fit, Calling, Career success, Management
Background
With China’s rapid economic development and social progress, public demand for healthcare has diversified, intensifying competition in the medical industry. This evolving landscape places greater demands on medical institutions, underscoring a skilled talent team as a core competitive advantage for achieving long-term strategic development [1]. The quality of a country’s medical and health talents determines its level of medical progress and is the key to maintaining a position at the forefront of global medicine [2]. High-level talents in medical and health professions (HLT-MHP) are the core subject to promote high-quality development in the field of medicine and health. Due to the lack of objective, quantitative, and scientifically sound talent evaluation criteria with clear classifications and precise dimensions, HLT-MHP struggle to transcend the established development framework and fully utilize their expertise [3]. The phenomenon of human resource waste persists, with challenges in developing careers and promoting titles due to limited talent development, talent accumulation, and difficulty expressing talent worth [4]. Therefore, given the issues with talent cultivation, career development, and title promotion in the industry, investigating how HLT-MHP can better handle the difficulties and roadblocks in their career development to achieve career success, as well as the current state of their career success, remains necessary.
Career success refers to the accumulation of positive psychological or work-related accomplishments by individuals along their career growth process [5]. Achieving career success involves personal growth, fulfillment of needs, and recognizing one’s self-worth [6]. Career success encompasses subjective and objective aspects. Subjective career success refers to a person’s subjective assessment of their work habits, encompassing job and income satisfaction, among others [7]. Objective success involves observable, quantifiable measures such as salary, social standing, skills, and reputation [8]. Contemporary career paths require continuous adaptation due to socioeconomic shifts and labor market uncertainties. This dynamism has, in turn, evolved the criteria for career success—shifting from external, objective benchmarks to internal, subjective fulfillment, and further extending to the individual’s life outside of the workplace [9]. Therefore, this study examines the current state of HLT-MHP from a subjective and objective perspective and analyzes the factors influencing this group’s career success. It plays a major guiding function in the reform of the HLT-MHP training model and helps to further define the direction of higher education in developing these abilities. In addition, it can serve as a reference for medical and health professionals to succeed in their careers, which is also an important issue for sustainable development in the field of medical and health.
Many academics, domestically and internationally, have been studying career success in recent years, mostly concentrating on positive behavior, personal traits, and environmental impact. Positive behavior includes factors such as professional identity [10], work engagement [11], and psychological capital [12]; personal traits include emotional quotient [13] and personal character [14]; environmental impacts include the working environment [15]. Rubio et al. [16] developed a career success model for medical scientists that evaluates the factors associated with career success for medical scientists and helps trainers in educational institutions identify and intervene early with potential medical scientists to ensure their career success. Their model emphasizes multiple factors critical to success at various levels, which can be categorized into personal factors (such as demographics, psychosocial environment, and education) and organizational factors (such as the institution’s financial resources and infrastructure). Some studies [17, 18] have analyzed the relationship between calling, person–organization fit, and career success. However, few research has analyzed the relationship between the three, and existing studies have not explored the career success of HLT-MHP.
The concept of calling has long been embedded in sociocultural contexts and has been widely utilized in domestic and international research. Calling is a process of self-actualization and self-discovery in which a person works at something they find meaningful and that, although not providing considerable material benefit, can aid in their self-realization [19]. Dobrow et al. [20] proposed that the sense of calling refers to a strong and significant enthusiasm and strength experienced by individuals in a specific field of work. Li et al. [21] suggested that calling is a crucial variable in gauging a person’s quest for meaning and purpose in their career. Pursuing meaning in life is a basic human motivation, and given that an individual’s career takes up a significant portion of their life cycle, seeking meaning and a sense of calling in one’s career is an important component of the individual’s search for meaning in life and an important driving force for their active engagement in work [22]. The HLT-MHP possess a wealth of clinical experience, high academic attainment, and outstanding contributions in their fields. Therefore, they have a high sense of responsibility and calling for their careers and will continue to challenge themselves in their professions. Wrzesniewski [23] proposed that calling is an individual’s perception of the importance of work, as well as the recognition of the social significance and value of work. Calling involves the relationship between oneself and the profession, including values and other relevant factors [24], which can provide powerful and profound professional significance by linking self-identity and professional roles [21]. Currently, the majority of studies on the sense of calling are quantitative, examining its contributing elements and correlations with other variables, such as demographic traits [25], life satisfaction [26], and organizational commitment [27].
Relationship between person–organization fit and the career success of HLT-MHP
Person–organization fit refers to the compatibility between individuals and organizations, specifically the similarity between individual traits and the values, objectives, and culture of an organization [28, 29]. Studies have indicated [28, 30] that person–organization fit can be interpreted through three dimensions: value fit, needs–supplies fit, and demands–abilities fit. Value fit emphasizes the similarity between an individual’s and an organization’s core values; needs–supplies fit occurs when the organization fulfills the individual’s needs and desires; demands–abilities fit is achieved when an individual’s capabilities meet the requirements of the organization [30]. Position level, salary, and performance are indicators of an individual’s abilities recognized by the organization or the outward manifestation of their career success. Studies [31, 32] have demonstrated that an individual’s commitment and trust in the organization are positively correlated with the degree of person–organization fit, and that fit can also be a powerful predictor of job performance. Robert et al. [33] also noted that person–organization fit can directly affect individual job promotion and salary, establishing a positive correlation with these factors. Individual career success is not only influenced by personal traits but also depends on the individual as well as relationships with others [6]. Compensation, promotion, and performance are largely determined by interpersonal relationships and organizational factors [6, 29]. Therefore, individual career success is also affected by the organizational environment, which is the result of the interaction between individuals and the environment. In conclusion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1
Person–organization fit is positively associated with the career success of HLT-MHP.
Relationship between person–organization fit and the calling of HLT-MHP
The theory of self-congruity posits that an individual’s motivation depends on their sense of self-worth, and that individuals will constantly seek behaviors consistent with self-cognition to obtain psychologically coordinated and pleasurable experiences [34]. When the individual and the organization are highly matched, the individual’s ability and the organizational needs are more consistent. In the process of completing their work, the individual will continually learn new skills and methods, enhance self-competitiveness, perceive their actions as valuable, realize their potential, and subsequently strengthen their calling, leading them to feel more driven to succeed in their careers. Based on this, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2
Person–organization fit is positively associated with the calling of HLT-MHP.
Relationship between calling and the career success of HLT-MHP
Motivation theory posits that motivation is an internal drive that generates desires and behaviors, serving as a prerequisite for individual attitudes and behaviors [35]. Furthermore, an individual possessing a drive to succeed in a particular area leads to actions that yield various positive effects on an organization [35]. Calling is a strong, meaningful passion for a specific area of work [20] that can affect career success. On the contrary, pursuing one’s calling is a process that involves self-determination [26]. Individuals’ professional identity, social value, and pay for performance will all improve in proportion to their career success in the field, and their calling will become stronger. Research [36] has indicated that when individuals’ employment is solely focused on surviving and achieving social status or financial gain, rather than going above and beyond self-interest to attain self-worth and career success, their calling will unavoidably be harmed. Thus, calling and career success are positively associated. Based on this, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3
Calling is positively associated with the career success of HLT-MHP.
Mediating role of calling
In conclusion, person–organization fit is not only directly linked to career success but is also indirectly associated with it by stimulating an individual’s sense of calling. According to social exchange theory [37], when a high degree of person–organization fit exists among HLT-MHP, this supportive environment is perceived by individuals as a valuable resource provided by the organization, generating a sense of reciprocal obligation to repay the organization. This reciprocation is primarily reflected in a strong identification with the organization and a deep passion for their work, that is, a profound sense of calling. This sense of calling motivates individuals not only to focus on personal achievements but also to devote themselves to the realization of organizational goals, thereby attaining greater career success. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4
Calling mediates the relationship between person–organization fit and career success.
Methods
Study design and participants
The research design employed in this study was a cross-sectional survey. HLT-MHP were selected as participants from 125 medical facilities, 5 universities, and 1 research institute in Hunan Province, China, using a convenience sample approach. The following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) holding an associate senior (or above) professional title with a master’s degree or higher, or a senior professional title with a bachelor’s degree or higher; (2) holding a position as a specialist, subject leader/director, or equivalent; and (3) providing informed consent and voluntarily participating in this study. The exclusion criterion was non-duty status during the investigation, such as those on sick leave or undertaking further study.
The fixed model in G Power software 3.1 was used to calculate the sample size required for multiple linear regression. Given f2 = 0.15, ɑ = 0.05, and 1 − β = 0.95, the minimum required sample size was calculated to be 222 cases. Accounting for a 20% potential for invalid responses, questionnaire removal and other reasons for sample loss, the required sample size was increased to 278 cases. A total of 400 HLT-MHP completed the survey; 391 valid responses were ultimately collected, resulting in a valid response rate of 97.8%.
Data collection
Data for this study were collected from April to June 2024 using an online questionnaire collection method. The researcher used Wenjuanxing (a professional and secure online questionnaire platform in China) to create the survey instrument and collect the data. Data collection was conducted by one researcher and two research assistants. The project lead contacted relevant leaders at medical institutions, universities, and research institutes to outline the study’s purpose, scope, and methodology. Upon submitting the relevant materials and obtaining consent, the online questionnaire link was delivered to the appropriate responsible person, who distributed it via WeChat group chat. Unified guidance was provided in the WeChat group to explain the questionnaire’s goal, the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the filling procedure, and matters requiring attention. Those who meet the requirements can click the link to fill out the questionnaire. The homepage of the questionnaire also contained a unified guide explaining the purpose and significance of the study and was set to be completed and submitted only after obtaining informed consent.
Outcome measures
General information questionnaire
The general information questionnaire was developed based on previous studies [38–40] and team discussions to collect the participants’ sociodemographic data. It includes details such as the unit category, region, gender, age, marital status, income per month, professional title, educational level, postdoctoral status, types of mentors acquired, work seniority, profession, annual frequency of external study, accessibility of external study opportunities, prior foreign exchange or study experience, self-evaluation of professional ability, and self-evaluation of social status.
Person–organization fit
The person–organization fit scale was originally developed by Cable and De Rue [41] and subsequently adapted into Chinese by Yang et al. [42]. This study used the Chinese version of the person–organization fit scale. The scale consists of nine total items across three dimensions: values fit (Items 1–3), needs–supplies fit (Items 4–6), and requirement–competence fit (Items 7–9). A sample item is: “My personal values match my organization’s values and culture.” Values fit pertains to aligning individual and organizational values; needs–supplies fit involves matching individual demands with organizational resources; and demands–abilities fit involves aligning individual competence with organizational requirements. Responses were captured using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from “1 = very disagree” to “5 = very agree.” The total score ranges from 9 to 45 points, where a higher score signifies better alignment between the individual and the organization. In this study, the scale demonstrated good internal consistency, with a total Cronbach’s α of 0.955 and Cronbach’s α values of 0.964, 0.927, and 0.944 for the respective dimensions.
Calling
The calling scale was originally developed by Dobrow et al. [20] and subsequently adapted into Chinese by Song et al. [43]. This study used the Chinese version of the calling scale. The scale is unidimensional and comprises 12 items. A sample item is: “I am passionate about my work.” The scale uses a five-point scoring, ranging from “1 = completely inconsistent” to “5 = completely consistent. ” The Cronbach’s α in this study was 0.946, which reflects good internal consistency for the scale.
Career success
The career success scale was originally developed by Eby [44] and subsequently adapted into Chinese by Yan et al. [45]. Li et al. [46] conducted a study to verify the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of this scale. This study used the Chinese version of the career success scale. The scale consists of 11 total items across three dimensions: intra-organizational competitiveness (Items 1–3), extra-organizational competitiveness (Items 4–6), and career satisfaction (Items 7–11). The career satisfaction dimension content is based on the scale by Greenhaus et al. [47]. A sample item is: “I am satisfied with the success I have achieved in my career.” It uses a five-point Likert scale ranging from “1 = strongly disagree” to “5 = strongly agree,” with a total score range of 11–55 points. A higher score indicates greater career success. In this study, the scale demonstrated good internal consistency, with a total Cronbach’s α of 0.933 and Cronbach’s α values of 0.922, 0.947, and 0.906 for the respective dimensions.
Data analysis
SPSS 25.0 was used for statistical analysis in this study, which included the descriptive analysis of general data, person–organization fit, calling, and career success metrics such as frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation. T-tests and ANOVA were used for group comparisons, and Pearson correlation was used to examine the relationships among person–organization fit, calling, and career success. Model 4 of Process 4.2 was used to assess mediating effects, applying a Bootstrap method with 5000 samples. AMOS 24.0 was used to test for common method bias, with a significance level of α = 0.05.
Ethics considerations
This study was approved by the hospital ethics review committee (No. 202437). Consent was obtained consent from leaders of medical institutions, universities, and research institutes prior to conducting the investigation. Online questionnaires could be completed only after securing informed consent from the participants. The study ensured anonymity and provided this assurance to the participants on the questionnaire’s front page. All provided information will be kept confidential and securely stored for survey purposes only.
Results
Common method bias analysis
To assess common method bias, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS. The model in which the items from the person–organization fit scale, calling scale, and career success scale all loaded onto a single common factor demonstrated an extremely poor model fit: χ2/df = 11.791, RMSEA = 0.166, CFI = 0.599, GFI = 0.424, NFI = 0.579, TIL = 0.571. This clear lack of fit indicates that common method bias is unlikely to be a serious concern in this study.
General demographic characteristics
A total of 391 HLT-MHP agreed to participate in the research study. Among these, the majority were affiliated with medical institutions, predominantly at the provincial level. Females constituted a larger proportion of the sample, and other demographic characteristics are detailed in Table 1.
Table 1.
Characteristics and univariate analysis of the career success(N = 391)
| Variable | Category | N | % | Career success(M ± SD) | t/F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unit category | Medical institutions | 345 | 88.2 | 41.55 ± 7.01 | 6.218 | 0.002 |
| Universities | 32 | 8.2 | 41.09 ± 4.88 | |||
| Research institutes | 14 | 3.6 | 34.93 ± 7.71 | |||
| Region | County | 135 | 34.5 | 41.76 ± 6.39 | 0.500 | 0.607 |
| perfecture-level city | 113 | 28.9 | 41.09 ± 7.26 | |||
| provincial level | 143 | 36.6 | 40.97 ± 7.31 | |||
| Gender | Male | 166 | 42.5 | 42.50 ± 7.37 | 3.013 | 0.003 |
| Female | 225 | 57.5 | 40.37 ± 6.56 | |||
| Age (years) | ≤ 35 | 6 | 1.6 | 38.00 ± 8.32 | 1.027 | 0.393 |
| 36–40 | 62 | 15.9 | 41.68 ± 7.51 | |||
| 41–45 | 171 | 43.7 | 41.71 ± 7.31 | |||
| 46–50 | 83 | 21.2 | 40.22 ± 6.96 | |||
| ≥ 51 | 69 | 17.6 | 41.39 ± 5.40 | |||
| Marital status | Single | 2 | 0.5 | 38.00 ± 7.07 | 0.830 | 0.437 |
| Married | 383 | 98.0 | 41.34 ± 7.02 | |||
| Others | 6 | 1.5 | 38.17 ± 4.17 | |||
| Income per month (CNY) | < 10,000 | 166 | 42.5 | 39.50 ± 6.82 | 8.605 | <0.0001 |
| 10,000–19,999 | 170 | 43.5 | 42.08 ± 6.58 | |||
| 20,000–29,999 | 42 | 10.7 | 43.38 ± 7.56 | |||
| ≥ 30,000 | 13 | 3.3 | 46.62 ± 6.29 | |||
| Professional title | Associate senior professional title | 204 | 52.2 | 40.28 ± 6.96 | -2.955 | 0.003 |
| Senior professional title | 187 | 47.8 | 42.35 ± 6.87 | |||
| Educational level | Bachelor’s degree | 196 | 50.1 | 41.04 ± 6.67 | 0.235 | 0.791 |
| Master’s degree | 109 | 27.9 | 41.46 ± 7.23 | |||
| Doctor’s degree | 86 | 22.0 | 42.58 ± 7.42 | |||
| Postdoctoral status | Yes | 23 | 5.9 | 41.40 ± 6.87 | 1.427 | 0.154 |
| No | 368 | 94.1 | 39.26 ± 8.51 | |||
| Types of mentors acquired | Master supervisor | 122 | 31.2 | 41.11 ± 7.71 | 0.645 | 0.525 |
| Doctoral supervisor | 27 | 6.9 | 41.74 ± 5.14 | |||
| None | 242 | 61.9 | 41.19 ± 6.78 | |||
| Work seniority (years) | 5–10 | 8 | 2.0 | 37.13 ± 10.51 | 1.388 | 0.246 |
| 11–15 | 74 | 18.9 | 42.18 ± 7.73 | |||
| 16–20 | 123 | 31.5 | 41.10 ± 6.72 | |||
| ≥ 21 | 186 | 47.6 | 41.21 ± 6.65 | |||
| Profession | Clinical medicine | 218 | 55.8 | 42.48 ± 6.78 | 5.863 | <0.0001 |
| Medical imaging | 20 | 5.1 | 43.30 ± 5.83 | |||
| Pharmacy | 24 | 6.1 | 38.88 ± 7.90 | |||
| Nursing | 117 | 29.9 | 39.11 ± 6.79 | |||
| Others | 12 | 3.1 | 41.83 ± 6.97 | |||
| Annual frequency of external study | None | 49 | 12.5 | 37.73 ± 7.57 | 6.262 | <0.0001 |
| 1–2 times | 228 | 58.3 | 41.27 ± 6.80 | |||
| 3–4 times | 76 | 19.4 | 42.71 ± 5.82 | |||
| ≥ 5 times | 38 | 9.7 | 42.97 ± 7.95 | |||
| Accessibility of external study opportunities | Not easy | 142 | 36.3 | 39.32 ± 7.23 | 6.279 | <0.0001 |
| Relatively easy | 186 | 47.6 | 42.25 ± 6.32 | |||
| Easy | 52 | 13.3 | 43.02 ± 6.25 | |||
| Very easy | 11 | 2.8 | 41.73 ± 11.79 | |||
| Prior foreign exchange or study experience | Yes | 334 | 85.4 | 41.01 ± 7.20 | -1.820 | 0.070 |
| No | 57 | 14.6 | 42.82 ± 5.32 | |||
| Self-evaluation of professional ability | Average | 59 | 15.1 | 38.31 ± 6.96 | 6.831 | <0.0001 |
| Moderately Satisfied | 183 | 46.8 | 40.93 ± 6.80 | |||
| Satisfied | 126 | 32.2 | 42.65 ± 6.26 | |||
| Very Satisfied | 23 | 5.9 | 44.04 ± 9.39 | |||
| Self-evaluation of social status | Dissatisfied | 44 | 11.3 | 36.18 ± 6.12 | 16.359 | <0.0001 |
| Moderately Satisfied | 227 | 58.1 | 40.90 ± 6.31 | |||
| Satisfied | 104 | 26.6 | 43.37 ± 6.55 | |||
| Very Satisfied | 16 | 4.1 | 46.94 ± 11.05 |
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding
Career success scores with different demographic characteristics
As shown in Table 1, a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) exists in the career success scores between the different unit categories, gender, income per month, professional title, profession, annual frequency of external study, accessibility of external study opportunities, self-evaluation of professional ability, and self-evaluation of social status.
Person–organization fit, calling, and career success scores
The average total scores for person–organization fit, calling, and career success were 36.47 (SD 5.15), 49.73 (SD 6.78), and 41.27 (SD 6.98), respectively. The details are presented in Table 2.
Table 2.
Total scores and scores of various dimensions (N = 391)
| Variable | Number of entries | Score range | M ± SD | Average score per entry |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Career success | 11 | 11–55 | 41.27 ± 6.98 | 3.75 ± 0.63 |
| Career satisfaction | 5 | 5–25 | 19.60 ± 3.31 | 3.92 ± 0.66 |
| Intra-organizational competitiveness | 3 | 3–15 | 10.97 ± 2.46 | 3.66 ± 0.82 |
| Extra-organizational competitiveness | 3 | 3–15 | 10.70 ± 2.36 | 3.57 ± 0.79 |
| Calling | 12 | 12–60 | 49.73 ± 6.78 | 4.14 ± 0.57 |
| Person-organization fit | 9 | 9–45 | 36.47 ± 5.15 | 4.05 ± 0.57 |
Person–organization fit, calling and career success, and their associations
Table 3 shows that person–organization fit was positively correlated with calling (r = 0.739, P < 0.001) and career success (r = 0.660, P < 0.001). Calling was positively correlated with career success (r = 0.577, P < 0.001).
Table 3.
Variable relevance
| Career success | Career satisfaction | Intra-organizational competitiveness | Extra-organizational competitiveness | Person-organization fit | Calling | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Career success | 1 | |||||
| Career satisfaction | 0.893* | 1 | ||||
| Intra-organizational competitiveness | 0.881* | 0.696* | 1 | |||
| Extra-organizational competitiveness | 0.789* | 0.515* | 0.588* | 1 | ||
| Person-organization fit | 0.660* | 0.629* | 0.643* | 0.401* | 1 | |
| Calling | 0.577* | 0.518* | 0.544* | 0.413* | 0.739* | 1 |
Note: *p<0.01
Mediating role of calling
This study tested the mediating role of calling between person–organization fit and career success of HLT-MHP using Model 4 of Process 4.2 in the SPSS software. Unit categories, gender, income per month, professional title, profession, annual frequency of external study, accessibility of external study opportunities, self-evaluation of professional ability, and self-evaluation of social status were set as covariates. The mediation analysis indicated that person–organization fit is positively associated with career success (β = 0.585, P < 0.001), remaining significant even after accounting for the mediator sense of calling (β = 0.456, P < 0.001). Moreover, person–organization fit is significantly correlated with calling (β = 0.728, P < 0.001), which, in turn, is also positively associated with career success (β = 0.177, P < 0.001). The details are presented in Table 4; Fig. 1.
Table 4.
Results of the mediating role of calling
| predictive variables | Career success | Calling | Career success | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | t | β | t | β | t | |
| Person-organization fit | 0.585 | 14.940 | 0.728 | 19.792 | 0.456 | 8.279 |
| calling | 0.177 | 3.282 | ||||
| R2 | 0.492 | 0.553 | 0.506 | |||
| F | 36.903 | 47.033 | 35.39 | |||
Fig. 1.
Mediating effect model
A bootstrap analysis was performed by repeating sampling 5000 times with confidence intervals set at 95% to determine the significance of the mediating effect. Person–organization fit had a direct effect of 0.456 and an indirect effect of 0.129 on career success, with neither 95% CI including 0. This result suggests that calling partially mediates the relationship between person–organization fit and career success. (Refer to Table 5.)
Table 5.
The mediating effect of calling on person-organization fit and career success
| Effect type | Effect size | BootSE | 95%CI | P | Relative effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct effect | 0.456 | 0.075 | 0.471–0.765 | <0.001 | 77.95% |
| Indirect effect | 0.129 | 0.046 | 0.036–0.217 | <0.001 | 22.05% |
| Total effect | 0.585 | 0.053 | 0.689–0.897 | <0.001 |
Discussion
Person–organization fit, calling, and career success scores
The average score of career success items of HLT-MHP was 3.75 (0.63), which is above the theoretical mid-point of 3, suggesting a moderate-to-high level of career success. HLT-MHP possess extensive professional expertise and a strong professional reputation, granting them authority in clinical practice and unit management. In this study, the majority of these experts are aged between 41 and 45 years and primarily hold the professional title of associate senior professional title, indicating that they are in a rapid career progression. Compared to peers in healthcare, they exhibit clearer career planning and development pathways, and they consequently demonstrate a higher level of career success. The career success scale shows that the career satisfaction score is the highest, whereas the extra-organizational competitiveness score is the lowest. Career satisfaction scored the highest, indicating that HLT-MHP hold a positive subjective evaluation of their work. They are satisfied with their career choices and express a high level of approval toward their work environment, job content, and personal career development prospects. This high level of job satisfaction can further stimulate their enthusiasm and motivation at work, thereby promoting continuous progress in their career development. Extra-organizational competitiveness refers to an individual’s value to other organizations and the possibility of successful job-hopping [44]. The relatively low score in this aspect may be attributed to the fact that HLT-MHP already enjoy relatively stable career prospects, high salaries, and comprehensive benefits within their current institutions, allowing their personal career aspirations and values to be fulfilled without needing to seek opportunities elsewhere. Additionally, evaluations of external competitiveness are influenced by multiple factors such as policy changes, labor market conditions, and job characteristics [48]. Given that the employment environment in modern society is challenging, changing workplaces does not ensure the same perks for HLT-MHP. Moreover, due to the high degree of specialization in the healthcare industry, management systems and organizational cultures often vary significantly across different institutions. This may lead to potential adaptation challenges for HLT-MHP when transitioning to new work environments. Consequently, the score for extra-organizational competitiveness is the lowest. The above also suggests that HLT-MHP should maintain interpersonal communication and social networks, expand opportunities for formal and experiential learning, and constantly reflect on themselves in a dynamic career to enhance their professional competitiveness and achieve career success.
The average score of person–organization fit items of HLT-MHP was 4.05 (0.57), which is above the theoretical mid-point of 3, suggesting a moderate-to-high level of person–organization fit. It suggests that HLT-MHP are in good agreement with the values, goals, and organizational atmosphere of their organizations. On the one hand, the organization can meet the needs of the development of HLT-MHP, and the organization’s development also requires talent. On the other hand, HLT-MHP have a certain social status in the organization, with satisfactory salary, a good practice environment, and harmonious interpersonal relationships, leading to a stronger emotional attribution to the organization. HLT-MHP can further advance the organization through personal development.
The average score of calling items of HLT-MHP was 4.14 (0.57), which is above the theoretical mid-point of 3, suggesting a moderate-to-high level of calling. HLT-MHP deal with the lives of patients, and the knowledge and work material they have acquired surround human health. On the one hand, the profession itself necessitates a strong sense of calling and duty and the necessity to strive for error avoidance in day-to-day operations to prevent accidents [49]. On the other hand, HLT-MHP have extensive expertise in the field and are of a high caliber. They will continue to amass accomplishments in the course of academic research, professional development, saving lives, and treating illnesses. As a result, their social standing will progressively increase, and they will continue to be acknowledged by patients and valued by society. Consequently, as their years of employment and professional skills grow, so too will their calling in their work. Additionally, this suggests that relevant managers should focus on the alignment of workers’ needs with organizations; identify the values and work needs of more employees; enhance the work environment; fortify support; establish a clear system of rewards and punishments; recognize and reward outstanding, progressive, and unique contributions made by medical and health professionals; encourage and recognize their work results; foster an environment of trust within the organization; and heighten their calling.
Person–organization fit, calling and career success, and their associations
The results of this study show that the person–organization fit of HLT-MHP is positively related to career success, career satisfaction, intra- and extra-organizational competitiveness and calling. Achieving career success also indicates alignment with the organization’s ideals and culture [50]. HLT-MHP, the backbone of the medical and health fields, have achieved a degree of professional success in their organizations and fields; however, professional success is determined not only by individuals but also by other significant factors, including the organizational environment, leaders, interpersonal interactions [6]. For instance, the organization’s leaders control the important resources in the organization, such as salary and promotion [51]. Their attitudes, behaviors, and leadership styles constitute an important external environment for the development of HLT-MHP, which will affect the perception, recognition, and work behavior of HLT-MHP in their career [52]. When a person and an organization are a good fit, the organization will provide all the resources and opportunities needed for the person’s development, as well as identify and develop the person’s potential, thereby supporting the individual to help them achieve career success [53]. Concurrently, organizations are inclined to invest in employees who align closely with their values and goals. Such employees are more likely to be assigned challenging tasks, key projects, and opportunities for training and development, which significantly enhances their transferable skills and work experience. Furthermore, working in a supportive environment enables individuals to achieve outstanding performance, build a strong professional reputation, and boost their self-confidence. The psychological capital and market reputation accrued from internal career success thus increase an individual’s competitiveness in the external labor market. Hence, person–organization fit is positively correlated with extra-organizational competitiveness. In return, individuals will experience a powerful, fulfilling urge to put more time and effort into their work and consistently better themselves to produce more output and succeed in their careers. During this process, they will also feel more connected to their calling and increasingly convinced that the career path they have chosen is right and meaningful. All of these things will increase people’s dependence on and trust in the organization. For individuals with a strong sense of calling, the core meaning of work is to realize their intrinsic values [54]. They will actively evaluate and screen when seeking jobs, and seek an organizational environment consistent with their personal values [54]. Simultaneously, this values resonance and supportive organizational culture can effectively satisfy individuals’ basic psychological needs, such as autonomy, belongingness, and competence, thereby promoting their calling. Therefore, when individuals’ career fits with the environment, culture, and development direction of the organization where they work, their career success and calling will increase accordingly.
Calling is positively correlated with career success. In addition, the work of HLT-MHP is not only a profession but also a noble and meaningful cause that is related to human health, life, and dignity. When HLT-MHP possess a strong calling, they view their work not merely as a job but as a platform for realizing personal values and life goals [54]. This sense of purpose promotes subjective career success, enabling them to deeply appreciate the value and significance of their profession. Consequently, they become more committed and passionate, willingly assuming responsibilities and dedicating themselves to their work. This dedication is manifested in conducting research, advancing their field, imparting knowledge to students, providing treatment to patients, and aiding in their recovery. Throughout this process, these professionals continuously discover and improve themselves, achieve career success, and ultimately fulfill their professional ambitions. At the same time, individuals with a strong calling actively seek more opportunities for professional development. Specifically, they work to broaden their professional scope and competencies and are more willing to assume challenging tasks. These initiatives directly facilitate the accumulation of human capital (knowledge and skills) and social capital (relational networks), thereby laying the groundwork for objective career success, including promotions and salary increases [20].
Mediating role of calling
The study’s findings indicate that the calling of HLT-MHP plays a partial mediating role in the relationship between person-organization fit and career success. This means that for HLT-MHP, person-organization fit is not only directly associated with career success but also indirectly through a sense of calling. Therefore, when HLT-MHP are well-matched with the organization, they are likely to feel more motivated and supported, thereby enhancing their career success. Consequently, they work hard to prove their value and contribute to the organization’s advancement. Conversely, when there exists a mismatch between the organization and the individual, the individual feels that they cannot adjust to the workplace culture and loses their enthusiasm for their work. Consciously avoiding difficulties to prevent failure causes a reduction in individuals’ level of career success [55]. The external environmental support derived from person–organization fit also motivates individuals to pursue intrinsic interests and passions, rather than working solely for extrinsic rewards, thereby facilitating the formation of a sense of calling [20, 23]. Meanwhile, individuals with a strong sense of calling tend to exhibit greater work engagement, more proactive learning behaviors, and superior job performance. These positive behaviors and attitudes significantly enhance their subjective career success—characterized by a sense of meaning and satisfaction at work—which, in turn, promotes their objective career success [23, 56]. When HLT-MHP have a good person–organization fit degree and a strong calling, individuals not only fit the organization well but also recognize the work that they are doing. This congruence will bring strong and meaningful passion and strength to individuals, which is an important motivator for advancing their long-term professional development. This motivating factor will cause individuals to take the initiative to work; be willing to invest substantial time and energy; improve their professional knowledge, skills, social skills, and management abilities; and strive to overcome the occupational bottlenecks to succeed in their careers. The external environment and internal thoughts of HLT-MHP are therefore in a positive state when their person–organization fit and calling are at a good level and cooperate, which can support individuals to achieve career success.
Limitations
This study has certain limitations. First, this study recruited participants from 125 healthcare organizations, 5 universities, and 1 research institute in Hunan Province, China, using convenience sampling. The HLT-MHP in this study may systematically differ from the broader national population in terms of regional policies, resource access, and organizational culture. This approach may introduce selection bias and affect the sample’s representativeness, thereby potentially limiting the generalization of the findings. Consequently, the relationships identified in our mediation model may not applicable to other contexts, and the findings should be generalized with caution. Simultaneously, data collection was primarily conducted online (via Wenjuanxing). Although this method is efficient and facilitates access to potential research subjects, the sample could be biased toward individuals proficient with the internet and electronic devices, further limiting the generalizability of the findings. Future research could employ more representative sampling methods, expand the scope of the study, and adopt a combination of online and offline data collection approaches to obtain larger sample sizes, thereby further validating the research findings. Second, given that this study employed a cross-sectional design and the data was self-reported by HLT-MHP, recall bias may have occurred during the survey due to the influence of the respondents’ current conditions. This potential bias may introduce a degree of uncertainty into the relationships observed between the variables in the mediation analysis. In the future, longitudinal research can be conducted to mitigate recall bias, and qualitative research can be utilized to delve deeper into the elements that contribute to the career success of HLT-MHP.
Conclusion
The results of this study show that HLT-MHP scored moderately high in person–organization fit, calling, and career success. Person-organization fit is indirectly associated with career success, with this relationship being mediated by calling. Additionally, the findings imply that even after reaching career success, HLT-MHP should always be seeking to improve their competitiveness by acquiring new knowledge and skills. This continuous effort can satisfy their development needs and promote the organization’s progress while also strengthening their calling and person–organization fit. From an organizational perspective, understanding employees’ work plans and progress, clarifying the work’s direction, and offering strong support are important. Providing employees with the attention and care they deserve from the organization, enhancing their welfare, granting them the right to know and participate, improving the internal control system from the standpoint of organizational justice, optimizing the salary distribution plan and performance appraisal procedures, and recognizing and rewarding employees for their academic or clinical accomplishments are also essential. Finally, organizations should provide employees with the chance to learn and interact with one another. Training programs in scientific research and clinical skills, as well as theoretical and technical support, can be established to enable employees to carry out innovative work. These measures can strengthen employees’ feelings of organizational identity and belonging and advance the degree of person–organization fit. Individuals are more willing to put more effort into their work to reward the organization, advance continuously, strengthen their calling, and succeed in their careers when they believe that the company provides them with great support.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank all the high-level talents in medical and health professions who participated in this study, and all the hospitals, universities and research institutions that supported this study. Thanks to the funding of Hunan Province Philosophy and Social Science Project.
Abbreviations
- HLT-MHP
High-level talents in medical and health professions
- ANOVA
Analysis of variance
- χ2/df
Chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio
- CFA
Confirmatory factor analysis
- RMSEA
Root mean square error of approximation
- CFI
Comparative fit index
- GFI
Goodness of fit index
- NFI
Normed fit index
- TLI
Tucker-Lewis index
Author contributions
Study design: JH、WxZ、TtH、JzD; Data collection; JH、QlZ、WxZ; Data analysis: WxZ、WtX、JhL; Manuscript preparation: WxZ; Critical revisions for important intellectual content: WxZ、JH. All authors critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
The work is supported by Hunan Province Philosophy and Social Science Project (Fund NO.23JD070).
Data availability
Considering the privacy of participants, the data of this study is not disclosed. If you want to access the data set, please contact the corresponding author directly.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the ethics committee of Hunan Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated Hospital (NO. 202437). All respondents had informed consent and volunteered to participate in the study. The study was anonymous, and participants were assured that their information would be kept confidential and used only for this study. We certify that the study was performed in accordance with the 1964 declaration of Helsinki and later amendments.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Wang Y. Research on reasons and countermeasures for professional technicians loss in Z Hospital [master’ thesis]. Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics; 2023. 10.27175/d.cnki.gjxcu.2023.001729.
- 2.Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010;376(9756):1923–58. 10.1016/s0140-6736(10)61854-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Wang D, Zhu W, He L, et al. Research on scientific evaluation index system of medical talents in public hospitals. China Hosp. 2023;27(01):39–42. 10.19660/j.issn.1671-0592.2023.01.10. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Wang X, Guo J, Li J, et al. Research on the construction of a classification evaluation indicator system for composite medical talents. China Hosp. 2024;28(06):2–6. 10.19660/j.issn.1671-0592.2024.6.01. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Arthur MB, Khapova SN, Wilderom CPM. Career success in a boundaryless career world. J Organizational Behav. 2005;26(2):177–202. 10.1002/job.290. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Wang Z, Long L. Employees ' career success: the influence mechanism and explanatory power of social capital. Manage Rev. 2009;21(08):30–9. 10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2009.08.007. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Ng TWH, Feldman DC. Subjective career success: a meta-analytic review. J Vocat Behav. 2014;85(2):169–79. 10.1016/j.jvb.2014.06.001. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Spurk D, Hirschi A, Dries N. Antecedents and outcomes of objective versus subjective career success: competing perspectives and future directions. J Manag. 2019;45(1):35–69. 10.1177/0149206318786563. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Greenhaus JH, Kossek EE. The contemporary career: a work–home perspective. Annual Rev Organizational Psychol Organizational Behav. 2014;1(1):361–88. 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091324. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Wu C, Fu MM, Cheng SZ, et al. Career identity and career success among Chinese male nurses: the mediating role of work engagement. J Nurs Manag. 2022;30(7):3350–9. 10.1111/jonm.13782. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Li M, Yang F, Akhtar MW. Responsible leadership effect on career success: the role of work engagement and self-Enhancement motives in the education sector. Front Psychol. 2022;13:888386. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.888386. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Elsey V, Heijden BVd, Smith MA, et al. Examining the role of employability as a mediator in the relationship between psychological capital and objective career success amongst occupational psychology professionals. Front Psychol. 2022;13:958226. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.958226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Zhao Y, Sang B. The role of emotional quotients and adversity quotients in career success. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1128773. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1128773. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Urquijo I, Extremera N, Azanza G. The contribution of emotional intelligence to career success: beyond personality traits. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(23):4809. 10.3390/ijerph16234809. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Wang Y, Zhang L, Tian S, et al. The relationship between work environment and career success among nurses with a master’s or doctoral degree: A National cross-sectional study. Int J Nurs Pract. 2019;25(4):e12743. 10.1111/ijn.12743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Rubio DM, Primack BA, Switzer GE, et al. A comprehensive career-success model for physician-scientists. Acad Med. 2011;86(12):1571–6. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31823592fd. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Yamada M, Asakura K, Sugiyama S, et al. Insights from defining nurses’ career success: an integrative review. Nurs Open. 2024;11(1):e2040. 10.1002/nop2.2040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.El-Gazar HE, Taie ES, Elamir H, et al Does the presence of calling relate to career success? The role of strengths use and deficit correction among nurses Int Nurs Rev 2024;71(4):823–31. 10.1111/inr.12924. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Hall DT, Dawn E Chandler DE. Psychological success: when the career is a calling. J Organ Behav. 2005;26(2):155–76. 10.1002/job.301.
- 20.Dobrow SR, Tosti-Kharas J, Calling. The development of a scale measure. Pers Psychol. 2011;64(4):1001–49. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01234.x. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Li G, Xu J Research on the influence mechanism of calling pursuit on employees ' work engagement. Collected Essays Finance Econ. 2024;78–88. 10.13762/j.cnki.cjlc.2024.06.003.
- 22.Gu J, Jiang X, Ding S, et al. Career calling-driven work engagement: transcending and strengthening the effects of job and personal resources. Nankai Bus Rev. 2018;21(02):107–20. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Wrzesniewski A, McCauley C, Rozin P, et al. Jobs, Careers, and callings: people’s relations to their work. J Res Pers. 1997;31(1):21–33. 10.1006/jrpe.1997.2162. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zhao C, Chen Z. Research on the influence mechanism of workplace status on the sense of calling of craftsman skilled talents. Chin J Manage. 2021;18(11):1640–8. 10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2021.11.007. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Jiang H, Mei Y, Wang X, et al. Professional calling among nursing students: a latent profile analysis. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):299. 10.1186/s12912-023-01470-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Duffy RD, Dik BJ. Research on calling: what have we learned and where are we going? J Vocat Behav. 2013;83(3):428–36. 10.1016/j.jvb.2013.06.006. http://dx.doi.org/. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Afsar B, Umrani WA, Khan A. The impact of perceived calling on work outcomes in a nursing context: the role of career commitment and living one’s calling. J Appl Biobehavioral Res. 2019;24(1):e12154. 10.1111/jabr.12154. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Kristof AL. Person-organization fit: an integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Pers Psychol. 1996;49(1):1–49. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Kristof-Brown AL, Zimmerman RD, Johnson EC. Consequences of individual’s fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Pers Psychol. 2005;58(2):281–342. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Edwards JR. Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. International review of industrial and organizational psychology. Oxford, England: Wiley; 1991. pp. 283–357. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Chen X, Liu M, Liu C, et al. Job satisfaction and hospital performance rated by physicians in china: A moderated mediation analysis on the role of income and Person-Organization fit. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(16):5846. 10.3390/ijerph17165846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Sudibjo N, Prameswari RK. The effects of knowledge sharing and person-organization fit on the relationship between transformational leadership on innovative work behavior. Heliyon. 2021;7(6):e07334. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Robert D, Bretz, Judge TA. Person–Organization fit and the theory of work adjustment: implications for Satisfaction, Tenure, and career success. J Vocat Behav. 1994;44(1):32–54. 10.1006/jvbe.1994.1003. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Korman AK. Toward an hypothesis of work behavior. J Appl Psychol. 1970;54(1):31–41. 10.1037/h0028656. [Google Scholar]
- 35.Reynolds KM, Roberts LM, Hauck J. Exploring motivation: integrating the ARCS model with instruction. Ref Serv Rev. 2017;45(2):149–65. 10.1108/RSR-10-2016-0057. [Google Scholar]
- 36.Xie B, Zhang X, Miao J, et al. The connotation structure of calling in Chinese context, antecedent variables and excitation mechanism. Adv Psychol Sci. 2023;31(12):2219–31. 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2023.02219. [Google Scholar]
- 37.Cropanzano R, Mitchell MS. Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. J Manag. 2005;31(6):874–900. 10.1177/0149206305279602. [Google Scholar]
- 38.Shujie X, Chunxiang L, Ning Y, et al. Research on development status of and suggestions for young top-notch talents of traditional Chinese medicine: a case study of Qihuang scholars. Educ Chin Med. 2024;43(01):8–13. 10.3969/j.issn.1003-305X.2024.01.415. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Tianmei M, Man X, Jianlin C, et al. Analysis of the influencing factors of the growth of high-level leading talents of traditional Chinese medicine. China Health Hum Resour. 2023;01:29–33. 10.3969/j.issn.1008-7370.2023.01.007.
- 40.Shitang C. The Relationship between career delay of gratification, self-career management, and career success among knowledge workers [Master’ degree]: Zhejiang Gongshang University; 2012. 10.7666/d.Y2070184.
- 41.Cable DM, Derue DS. The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. J Appl Psychol. 2002;87(5):875–84. 10.1037/0021-9010.87.5.875. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Yang Y. Study on the relationship of person-organization fit,psychological empowerment and employee’s innovative behavior [Doctor’ thesis]: Jilin University; 2011. 10.7666/d.J0088231.
- 43.Song Z Research on the influence of leader’s career calling on employee and team creativity [Doctor’ thesis]. Southwestern University of Finance and Economics; 2021. 10.27412/d.cnki.gxncu.2021.002742.
- 44.Eby LT, Butts M, Lockwood A. Predictors of success in the era of the boundaryless career. J Organizational Behav. 2003;24(6):689–708. 10.1002/job.214. [Google Scholar]
- 45.Yan S, Wang Z, Du K, et al. An empirical study on the measurement tools of employee career success. J Wuhan Bus Univ. 2008;03:73–5. 10.3969/j.issn.1009-2277.2008.03.023.
- 46.Li Z, You L, Chan WC. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version career success scale among medical staff. Chin J Nurs. 2013;48(09):828–30. 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2013.09.020. [Google Scholar]
- 47.Greenhaus JH, Parasuraman S, Wormley WM. Effects of race on organizational experiences, job -performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Acad Manag J. 1990;33(1):64–86. [Google Scholar]
- 48.Li S. Research on the influence mechanism of person-organization fit on objective career success [Master’ thesis]. Zhejiang Gongshang University; 2024. 10.27462/d.cnki.ghzhc.2023.001416.
- 49.Li Y. The Influence of doctors’ career call on career success [Master’ degree]. Tianjin University of Commerce; 2017.
- 50.Liu N, Wang L, Yin J. Impact of transformational leadership on the person-organization fit of Chinese nurses: the moderating effect of emotional intelligence. Nurs Open. 2023;10(7):4586–96. 10.1002/nop2.1706. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Guo L, Du J. All for profit leadership: the antecedents, consequences and mechanism guidance of the bottom line of leadership Mind. Hum Resour Dev China. 2021;38(12):53–67. 10.16471/j.cnki.11-2822/c.2021.12.004. [Google Scholar]
- 52.Jia L, Di C, Yong Z, et al. The relationship between leader coaching behavior and newcomers’ person-environment fit from the dynamic perspective. Chin J Manage. 2025;22(08):1470–9. 10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2025.08.009. [Google Scholar]
- 53.Robbins B, Davidhizar R. Transformational leadership in health care today. Health Care Manag. 2020;39(3):117–21. 10.1097/hcm.0000000000000296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Dik BJ, Duffy RD. Calling and vocation at work: definitions and prospects for research and practice. Couns Psychol. 2009;37(3):424–50. 10.1177/0011000008316430. [Google Scholar]
- 55.Liu R, Lv J, Zhou S, et al. Intermediary role of achievement motivation in individual-organizational fit and professional success among clinical nurses. Occupation Health. 2023;39(21):2928–33. 10.13329/j.cnki.zyyjk.2023.0522. [Google Scholar]
- 56.Duffy RD, Bott EM, Allan BA, et al. Perceiving a calling, living a calling, and job satisfaction: testing a moderated, multiple mediator model. J Couns Psychol. 2012;59(1):50–9. 10.1037/a0026129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Considering the privacy of participants, the data of this study is not disclosed. If you want to access the data set, please contact the corresponding author directly.