International Journal of Public Administration

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpad20

A Link between Public Service Motivation,

Employee Outcomes, and Person–Organization Fit:
Evidence from Vietnam

Trinh Hoang Hong Hue, Huy-Cuong Vo Thai & My-Linh Tran

To cite this article: Trinh Hoang Hong Hue, Huy-Cuong Vo Thai & My-Linh Tran (2021):
A Link between Public Service Motivation, Employee Outcomes, and Person–Organization
Fit: Evidence from Vietnam, International Journal of Public Administration, DOI:
10.1080/01900692.2021.1912086

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1912086

Published online: 03 May 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 108

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lpad20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1912086

A Link between Public Service Motivation, Employee Outcomes, and Person–

Organization Fit: Evidence from Vietnam
a,b c c
Trinh Hoang Hong Hue , Huy-Cuong Vo Thai , and My-Linh Tran
a
Faculty of Economics, University of Economics and Law, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; bVietnam National University of Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi
Minh City, Vietnam; cStrategy and Development of Emerging Industry, College of Management, National Chi Nan University, Nantou, Taiwan

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
This study is innovative in terms of theory and results as it gives a new perspective on public service Public service motivation;
motivation (PSM) consistent with the context of Vietnamese public universities. We construct employee outcomes;
a research model with adjusted scales to examines the mediating role of person–organization fit, person–organization fit;
public universities; Vietnam
through which four dimensions of PSM (the attraction to policy-making, commitment to the public
interest, self-sacrifice, and compassion) affect both positive and negative aspects of employee
outcomes (work effort, organizational citizenship behaviors, turnover intention, and work-related
stress) in public higher education institutions in Vietnam. The results from 313 faculty and staff are
randomly drawn from 45 Vietnamese public universities, demonstrated that PSM and person–
organization fit have mixed effects on employee outcomes. Employees in public universities who
commit to the public interest and are attracted to public policy-making will exert more effort in
their work, but self-sacrifice and compassion do not directly affect their work effort. Additional,
faculty and staff who have high PSM are more likely to be associated with the performance of
organizational citizenship behaviors than individuals with low PSM. Furthermore, except for com­
passion, only three dimensions of PSM (self-sacrifice, commitment to the public interest, and
attraction to policy-making) have a significant direct negative effect on public employees’ turnover
intention. Besides, using structural equation modeling (SEM) point out that four dimensions of PSM
purposely guidance on the manipulation of employee outcomes. In other words, four dimensions
of PSM have significant positive relationships with person–organization fit, which in turn positively
impacts work effort and organizational citizenship behaviors, also negatively impacts public
employees’ work-related stress and their turnover intention. This research supplements very limited
current literature and supposes several implications concerning higher education policies for
public-sector managers in Vietnam.

Introduction
Public service motivation (PSM) has become the main
topic of interest in public administration research over
the past two decades. This concept refers to the aware­
ness and desire of public employees to voluntarily con­
tribute to the overall society development. Numerous
studies have attempted to investigate the relationship
between PSM, employee attitudes, especially job satis­
faction, and organizational commitment (Cerase, 2009;
Leisink & Steijn, 2009; Naff & Crum, 1999; Pandey &
Stazyk, 2008; Perry & Hondeghem, 2008; Perry & Wise,
1990; Taylor, 2007). Accordingly, they reveal that PSM is
positively related to the working attitude and behavior
of civil servants to better serve public interests.
Simultaneously, public employees are also more satisfied
with their jobs and have a more long-term commitment
to the public sector. In recent years, there has been
an increasing interest in the mediating effect of
person-organization fit in the association between PSM
and some positive outcomes such as job satisfaction (Liu
et al., 2015; Teo et al., 2015), job performance or work
attitudes (Bright, 2007, 2008; Kim, 2012; Wright &
Pandey, 2008). However, to date, there has been little
discussion about the significant role of person-
organization fit in the process through which PSM
affects the public employee’s outcomes (Gould-
Williams et al., 2015; Palma, 2016). The findings point
out that PSM positively affects person-organization fit,
thus having a positive relationship with organizational
citizenship behavior and a negative relationship with
well-being-related variables (work stress), and a work
attitude (intention to quit).
In the context of Vietnam – a developing country,
although socio-political organizations and state agencies
have regularly launched campaigns to improve the effi­
ciency of public service as well as the work performance

CONTACT Trinh Hoang Hong Hue huethh@uel.edu.vn Faculty of Economics, University of Economics and Law, Quarter 3, Linh Xuan Ward, Thu Duc
District, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.
of civil servants, this process has not achieved the
expected results. Therefore, instead of campaigning
like before, we can turn to enhance the PSM, leading
to higher levels of attitudes, as well as behavior, job
satisfaction of public employees, and long-term commit­
ment to public organizations. Studies involving PSM
began in Vietnam in 2016, yet far too much attention
has been paid to factors affecting PSM or the impact of
PSM on job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
and work performance of civil servants, or the mediating
role of PSM for sharing knowledge among public offi­
cials (Tuan Luu, 2016; Tuan, 2018; Phuong Nguyen,
2017). In addition, there have been no controlled studies
examining the relationship between PSM, Person-
organization fit, and employee outcomes in the public
sector, especially in public higher education institutions.
This study is innovative in terms of theory and results as
it gives a new perspective on PSM consistent with the
context of Vietnamese public universities. We construct
a research model with adjusted scales to assess the rela­
tive impact of four dimensions of PSM on person-
organization fit, and employee’s behavior-related
outcomes. Especially, concerning employee outcomes,
we not only focus on both negative outcomes (i.e., turn­
over Intention and work-related stress) but also positive
ones (i.e., work effort and organizational citizenship
behavior).
The article is structured as follows. First, we provide
an overview of the research context: Vietnamese public
universities. Thereafter, we discuss the direct links
between PSM, person-organization fit, and employee
outcomes; and highlight how person-organization fit
mediates the process through which PSM affects
employee outcomes. Following the research methodol­
ogy, we use structural equation modeling (SEM) to test
the study’s hypotheses. Our findings and discusions of
their implications for both theory and practice are in the
final section.
Research context: Vietnamese public
universities
After 30 years since the 1986 Doi moi (Renovation),
Vietnam now is one of the most dynamic emerging
countries in the Southeast Asian region. With a high
economic growth rate of approximately 7% in recent
years, Vietnam has transformed itself from one of the
world’s poorest nations to a middle-income country.
Due to a relatively dense and young population with
a high literacy rate, Vietnam has become an attractive
place for foreign direct investment (FDI). The
Vietnamese work ethic values system has been widely
known as compassion; honesty; solidarity; patriotic,
hard-working and creativity (Ho, 2015). Furthermore,
foreign investors also appreciate Vietnamese employees’
diligence, hard-working, skillfulness as well as kindness,
and trustworthiness (Kokubun, 2017). Theoretically,
work ethic values would influence employees’ attitudes
and behaviors (Langton et al., 2016). We would antici­
pate that there will be high levels of PSM and positive
work-related attitudes and behaviors of employees in
both the public and private sectors. Hence, our study
aims to test these above assumptions.
In Vietnam, employment in the public sector is more
desirable rather than the private sector because of its job
security and high status. According to the survey con­
ducted by the General Statistics Office (GSO) and the
International Labor Organization (ILO), 64.2% of entry-
level graduates in 2015 and approximately two-thirds of
fresh university graduates in Vietnam prefer working in
the government to the private sector (VnExpress, 2017).
However, recently the private sector has been a key
contributor to job creation with 557,000 new jobs on
average per year as well as overtaken State-owned enter­
prises in terms of salaries for employees and workers
(Binh, 2019). Especially, recently the state has allowed
private businesses “to do what they do well” such as
providing public services: health, and education, along
with manufacturing (VnExpress, 2019). We predict that
there will be substantial competition between the public
sector and the private sector in terms of attracting
employees for public service delivery. Therefore, in the
Vietnam context, PSM is sector-specific as employees
have the same values whether they work in public or
private sectors.
Regarding Vietnamese higher education, until now
there have been 237 universities, including 172 public
universities and 65 non-public ones (MOET, 2020).
Vietnamese higher education mainly depends on state
universities that providing the Vietnamese labor work­
force needed for developing the country’s economy
(GSO, 2017). In which, faculty and staff play a key role
in determining the quality of higher education even
though each institution has different educational goals
and requirements with specific features. The numbers of
these public employees are approximately 64.772,
account for 77.5% of total employees working in uni­
versity nationwide (MOET, 2020). Based on the 2010
Law on Public Employees (Luat Vien chuc), they are
public employees that “recruited according to working
positions, working in public non-business units under
working contracts and salaried from salary funds of
public non-business units in accordance with law”.
Accordingly, in the case of public universities, they are
professional officials having competencies in teaching,
scientific research, and community service. However,

they are difficult to devote themselves wholeheartedly to
the university because of several causes such as low
official salaries and time-consuming administrative
involving stuff. Hence, they often earn extra income
from outside teaching jobs and scientific research pro­
jects or take an entry-level job in the private sector. To
improve the quality of public higher education, creating
a favorable, healthy working environment as well as
creating consensus to facilitating faculty and staff’s ser­
ving desires are very important. This study fully focuses
on the Public Service Motivation (PSM) of the public
employee group (vien chuc) who work for public service
delivery agencies, particularly faculty and staff in public
universities to encourage them to make greater efforts to
pursue higher mission valence.
Literature review and hypothesis development
Public service motivation (PSM)
Over the past few decades, public human resource man­
agement has aimed to improve the efficiency of the
public service (Battaglio, 2015). There have been essen­
tial questions concerning what motivates the public sec­
tor employees to recognize and respond to causes
uniquely oriented toward doing a certain type of work
(i.e., serve the public good, poverty-reducing policy pro­
grams (Perry & Wise, 1990)). The answer can origin
from the service ethic, which is a desire to pursue the
public interest or Public Service Motivation (PSM)
might be behind the decision to pursue public institu­
tion (Rainey, 2009).
Perry and Wise (1990, p. 368) first define PSM as “an
individual predisposition to respond to motives
grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions.”
Three bases of public service motivation comprising
rational, norm-based, and affective are identified by
Perry and Wise (1990). These motives appear to be
primarily associated with public service. In a more
detailed manner, rational motives concerning the pro­
cess of policy formulation, commitment to a public
program; norm-based motives express a desire to
serve the public interest for social equality; and affec­
tive motives depict commitment to a social program
and patriotism of benevolence. Accordingly, Perry
James (1996) developed a multidimensional scale to
measure public service motivation which has four com­
ponents to form the basis of this study: attraction to
public policy formation, commitment to the public
interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice. In particular,
attraction to public policy-making is “a rational one
and gauges individual perceptions of politics and the
policy-making process” (Battaglio, 2015, p. 221). The
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 3
three remaining constructs assess more altruistic per­
ceptions of public service: commitment to the public
interest gauges an employee’s unique sense of civic
duty; compassion assesses employee’s commitment
for patriotism and benevolence; and self-sacrifice
gauges the employee’s willingness to act for the other
interests regardless of personal consequences.
Public service motivation and employee outcomes
Public service motivation and work effort
Work Effort refers to “the amount of physical and mental
energy devoted to work and is different from the skill and
responsibility requirements of a given job and the parti­
cular constellation of skills and experience a worker brings
to it” (Bielby & Bielby, 1988, p. 1032). Many empirical
pieces of evidence show that PSM is an important pre­
dictor of individual performance in public sectors
(Leisink & Steijn, 2009; Ritz et al., 2016). Employees
with high PSM are generally willing to exert their extra
effort in work, which is considered to be a direct beha­
vioral outcome of commitment that contributes to job
performance. According to Gould-Williams (2003),
employee commitment has the greatest predictive effect
on work effort. Their findings imply that committed
public-sector staffs are more likely to exert effort to
achieve the desired performance for the common orga­
nization’s interest. Hence, with high PSM, individuals
would show more extra-role behavior and more com­
mitment to reaching the public goal when their goals
align with that of the public organization (van Loon
et al., 2015). Additionally, the commitment to the public
interest, a sub-dimension of PSM, is positively related to
a greater willingness to exert job effort (Leisink & Steijn,
2009; Pedersen, 2014). In other words, public officials
would be associated with more working hours in the
agency.
Public employees with high PSM are better able to
exert their motivation because they perceive that their
work effort may be worthwhile directed toward the
public (Andersen & Kjeldsen, 2013). Similarly, when
a public employee experiences the pro-social influence
of the tasks, their effort would be increased which leads
to high job performance (Grant, 2008). Although a large
and growing body of literature has investigated the
importance of PSM in work effort, they mainly empha­
size job performance than its process of the work effort
to achieve the expected goals. Ritz et al. (2016) assert that
only 5 out of 239 studies on the relationship between
PSM and work effort. In particular, four studies report
that PSM has a positive effect on work effort, while the
remaining paper has a neutral result. Therefore, with the
purpose to provide supplement evidence on the
4 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.
relationship between PSM and work effort, we hypothe­
size that there is a positive relationship between PSM
and work effort:
H1: The level of PSM is associated with a higher
work-effort of public employees at Vietnamese public
universities.
Public service motivation and organizational
citizenship behavior
Organizational citizenship behavior is an aspect of
employee outcomes that benefit not only individuals
but also their colleagues and organizations. In public
administration, organizational citizenship behavior is
widely known as voluntary and informal behaviors of
employees which contributes to the effective operation
of the organization and promotes the performance of
public service regardless of receiving recognition or not
(Gould-Williams et al., 2015; Jin et al., 2018; Organ,
1988b). Theoretically, organizational citizenship beha­
vior links to the outcomes at both the individual and
organizational levels (e.g., rating employee performance,
allocation of rewards for employees; organizational pro­
ductivity, efficiency, costs reducing, and customer satis­
faction) (Podsakoff et al., 2009). Hence, organizational
citizenship behavior is a useful means for managing the
interdependencies among a work unit’s members, which
increases the collective outcomes and organizational
effectiveness (Kim, 2006). Employees with higher orga­
nizational citizenship behavior will perform extra tasks
in addition to those stated in their job descriptions, such
as assisting colleagues, avoiding unnecessary conflicts,
and promoting a positive working environment (Kim,
2004).
Recent studies have provided evidence supporting
that PSM influences pro-social behaviors outside and
inside the organization (Harari et al., 2017). In addition
to promoting the common interests of the entire society,
PSM is also positively related to organizational citizen­
ship behavior of employees in the organization.
Employees with high PSM presenting the desire to
serve the public and create values for society would
drive organizational citizenship behavior in the organi­
zation (Kim, 2006). Based on the data collected in Korea,
Kim’s finding confirms this prediction. Similarly, an
investigation into the PSM – organizational citizenship
behavior relationship in the US supports the argument
that the positive influence of PSM on pro-social beha­
vior would extend to behavior within the organization
including organizational citizenship behavior (Pandey
et al., 2008). Besides, Boyd et al. (2018) report a partial
effect of PSM on organizational citizenship behavior
when examining the mediated effect of a sense of
community responsibility on the relationship between
PSM and organizational citizenship behavior in a US
non-profit health-care organization. In particular, there
is a significant direct effect of PSM on interpersonal
organizational citizenship behavior instead of organiza­
tional citizenship behavior at the organizational level.
Also, the sense of community responsibility is found to
fully mediate the relationship between PSM and inter­
personal organizational citizenship behavior. Jin et al.
(2018) extend organizational citizenship behavior in the
field of higher education as faculty often spend much of
the time for students (e.g., in-class interaction, lecture
preparation). They find out a positive association
between PSM and organizational citizenship behavior
among faculty in the US. Consistent with the predictions
and findings in existing literature, we assume that the
relationship between PSM and organizational citizen­
ship behavior is significantly positive in the context of
higher education institutions in Vietnam. This led to the
following hypothesis:
H2: The level of PSM is associated with a higher level of
organizational citizenship behavior of public employees
at Vietnamese public universities.
Public service motivation and turnover intention
Turnover Intention refers to the degree to which public
servants are consciously and deliberately willing to quit
their job at the public organization (Maffei, 2019). It is
the strongest cognitive antecedence having a directed
and positive association with actual turnover behavior
(Lee & Bruvold, 2003). Meanwhile, actual turnover
behavior is also affected by outward factors that are
hard to predict, such as alternative work opportunities.
In fact, an employee might have a high intention to quit
without an actual leaving decision. However, intention
to quit is often related to negative employee behaviors
such as lateness, absence, distractions, and underperfor­
mance at work. Such behaviors in turn negatively influ­
ence public service quality (Hanisch, 2002). Therefore,
the intention to quit is often used in management
research rather than actual behavior. In order to formu­
late the best strategy of human resource management in
retaining talents, scholars seek to find important deter­
minants of turnover intentions.
Recent evidence suggests that PSM has a negative
effect on turnover intentions (Bright, 2008; Gould-
Williams et al., 2015; Maffei, 2019; Moynihan &
Pandey, 2007). The higher the pressure, dissatisfaction,
and burnout that a public servant experiences at work,
the more likely (s)he voluntarily resigns (Maffei, 2019).
Theoretically, individuals with high PSM often seek jobs
that can satisfy their desire to serve the public and

altruistic motives. Because they almost certainly identify
themselves as a part of the organization where aligned
with their goal, thereby less likely to quit their job.
Empirically, contrary to the above argument, Gould-
Williams et al., (2013) shows that there is a non-
significant direct effect of PSM on turnover intentions,
but fully significant mediated by POF. Similarly, Bright
(2008) proposed that PSM directly influences the inten­
tion to quit of employees in public institutions.
Employees with higher PSM are more satisfied with
their jobs and less likely to quit than those who have
lower PSM. However, his study fails to provide evidence
supporting the hypothesis that PSM has a negative effect
on turnover intentions of public servants which are
mediated by Personal-Organizational fit. Besides, there
is evidence proving that PSM has a significantly negative
effect on tenure in public organizations (Moynihan &
Pandey, 2007).
Although the existing PSM-turnover intentions lit­
erature has inconsistent findings, in line with the general
argument, we predict that an employee in higher educa­
tion institutions with high PSM is less likely to quit their
job compared with those who have lower PSM. Thus, we
hypothesize that:
H3: The level of PSM is associated with a lower level of
turnover intentions of public employees at Vietnamese
public universities.
Public service motivation and work-related stress
Work-related stress appears in the situation when indi­
viduals perceived that the job requirements exceed their
knowledge, proficiency, and resources (Bao & Zhong,
2021; Gould-Williams et al., 2015). It is also a result of
the lack of ability to cope with work stressors (Clarke &
Cooper, 2000). According to Bao and Zhong (2021),
stressors often trigger work-related stress including
“work overload (e.g., Gould-Williams et al., 2015), orga­
nizational politics (e.g., Vigoda-Gadot & Meisler, 2010),
emotional demands (e.g., Hsieh, 2014), goal ambiguity
(e.g., Andrews & Mostaf, 2019), role conflict (e.g., Hsu
et al., 2010), and red tape (e.g., Giauque et al., 2013”).
Occupational stress negatively impacts individuals’ phy­
sical and mental health, such as irritability, sleep disor­
ders, hypertension, and anxiety, that increase harmful
attitudes and behaviors and reduced personal perfor­
mance (Liu et al., 2014). The teaching profession might
be more vulnerable than many other careers because job
specificity results in higher levels of emotional exhaus­
tion experienced (Kahn, 1993). Furthermore, higher
stress could undermine public-sector efficiency and
effectiveness (McHugh & Brennan, 1994).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 5
PSM can be used as a useful resource for public
employees because it can reduce the sources of stress
they face at work (Bakker, 2015). Although stress causes
great damage to both private and public employees as well
as the organization where they work, little attention has
been paid to identify its antecedents in the public context,
especially the inverse link between PSM and work-related
stress (Gould-Williams et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2014). PSM
can act as stress relievers for those who desire to make
a positive contribution to society (Gould-Williams et al.,
2015). Thus, he argues that workers with high PSM will
be satisfied with their job when their effort created value
for society, leading to reduce work-related stress.
However, the findings indicate that as public employees’
PSM increases, the levels of work-related stress are also
likely to rise. Especially, there is an indirect negative effect
of PSM on work-related stress when the mediated role of
personal-organizational fit is taking into account.
Similarly, empirical research by Liu et al. (2014) also
supports the role of PSM in reducing the negative impact
of work-related stress on the health of police officers.
Their work shows that the lower the motivation of police
officers to serve the public, the more likely they are to be
exposed to work-related stress, making them even more
exhausted and anxious.
In reverse, some scholars propose that PSM would
mitigate the negative impact of organizational politics (a
stressor in the workplace) on work attitude and organi­
zational performance; and employees with high PSM
would expect more pressure to achieve their work per­
formance’s goal (Giauque et al., 2013; Park & Lee, 2020).
In other words, there is a positive effect of PSM on work-
related stress. However, their results indicate that high
PSM public officials are more vulnerable to organiza­
tional politics than those who have low levels of PSM.
Due to the inconsistent findings of previous studies,
we aim to supplement a better understanding of the
relationship between these two variables. Given the the­
oretical arguments as well as empirical evidence, we
predict that the higher the level of PSM civil servants,
the lower the pressure they will encounter. Accordingly,
we hypothesize that:
H4: The level of PSM is associated with the lower level of
work-related stress of public employees at Vietnamese
public universities.
Public service motivation and person-organization fit
The article focuses on the fit between an individual
and an organization rather than between an indivi­
dual and the entire environment or a specific job. In
6 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.
fact, person-organization fit is expected to provide
a more plausible explanation for the inconsistent
findings concerning the relationship between PSM
and employee outcomes (Bright, 2008), especially in
the context of higher education (Jin et al., 2018).
There are at least two major approaches advancing
the understanding of person-organization fit (Kristof-
Brown et al., 2005). The first domain captures the
supplementary-complementary congruence between
individuals and organizations. Supplementary con­
gruence occurs when the characteristics such as
goals and values of the two parties are similar,
whereas complementary congruence occurs when
both parties provide what the other is missing
(Kristof, 1996). The second perspective on person-
organization fit concentrates on the supply-demand
distinction in the workplace. Person-organization fit
can be achieved when organizations offer and satisfy
individuals’ needs, desires, or preferences, and con­
trarily, individuals possess the skills or abilities that
organizations demand (Caplan, 1987). Generally, per­
son-organization fit is widely understood as the com­
patibility of employees and their organizations
achieved when the goal or value of these two parties
coincides with each other or both parties satisfy the
demands of each other (Jin et al., 2018; Kim, 2012).
A growing body of research advocates that the degree
of compatibility between individuals and public organiza­
tions will likely be affected by the PSM level (Bright, 2008;
Kim, 2012). Individuals with a high level of PSM are more
likely to work at government institutions compared to
those with lower PSM because they perceive that their
values and goals match with those public organizations
(Gould-Williams et al., 2015; Jin et al., 2018). High PSM
individuals are those who often seek to serve the public
and create common values for pro-social, whereas public
organizations are where offer opportunities to satisfy their
motives. However, the level of compatibility of high PSM
individuals depends on their distinct characteristics and
the missions, goals, cultures, resources, and job tasks of
different public organizations (Bright, 2008). When the
expectations of high PSM employees cannot be met by
their institutions, a mismatch between them will occur
(Perry & Wise, 1990). Then, they will most likely adjust
their interests and goals to match the organization or find
other ones that are compatible with them. Recent empiri­
cal evidence reports that a high level of PSM significantly
associates with person-organization fit, and the fit of
individuals with their institutions is strengthened by the
higher level of PSM (Bright, 2007, 2008; Gould-Williams
et al., 2015; Kim, 2012; Wright & Pandey, 2008).
Consistent with prior findings, we hypothesize the
following:
H5: The level of PSM is associated with a higher level
of person-organization fit of public employees at
Vietnamese public universities.
Public service motivation, person-organization fit,
and employee outcomes
The role of person-organization fit has been recognized
in PSM literature, but prior studies have not specifically
assessed the direct impact of person-organization fit on
employee outcomes (Jin et al., 2018; Kim, 2012). In
addition to the mediated role of person-organization
fit on the relationship between PSM and Employee
Outcomes, person-organization fit is also directly
related to employees’ work attitudes and behavior
such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
task performances, organizational citizenship behavior,
and turnover intentions. The degree of compatibility
between individuals and their institutions will influ­
ence the extent to which they exhibit citizenship beha­
viors (Gould-Williams et al., 2015). When employees
believe that their personal values and career goals are
well fit with those of the organization, they are more
likely to take extra-role behaviors directed at both
interpersonal and organizational levels (Wei, 2012).
Involving the turnover intentions of individuals in the
education sector, employees are attracted to an organi­
zation that shared the same values and missions, and
vice versa (Choi & Chung, 2018). Besides, employees
with higher organizational tenure are more likely to
stay longer in the organization. Nevertheless, if there
is a misfit in terms of values and goals between these
two parties, employees will leave the organization.
High person-organization fit levels make it easier for
individuals to work and accomplish their duty, thereby
reduced stress levels at work (Gould-Williams et al.,
2015). In contrast, the level of work-related stress
increases as the fundamental characteristics of the
organization deviate from those of the individual. The
more deviation exists, the larger mismatch between
them, which leads to a chain of negative effects gener­
ated by stress. Furthermore, the individual-
organization values congruence increases the likeli­
hood of employees to undertake extra-role behaviors
that help the organization achieve its mission and
objectives (Cable & DeRue, 2002). Public employees
would exert more effort in work for the benefit of
their organization when their goals align with that of
the public organization (van Loon et al., 2015).
Concerning the causal effect of the fit between personal
and organizational values on individual effort in the
team contests for pro-social individuals and pro-self-
oriented individuals, pro-social ones exert more effort

to match their preferences in an organizational culture
that than their counterparts (Andersson et al., 2015).
Person-organization fit is an important explanatory
of employee outcomes (Bright, 2007; Hoffman &
Woehr, 2006; Kim, 2012; Verquer et al., 2003). There is
a significant positive effect of person-organization fit on
Organizational citizenship behavior, and significant
negative effects on work-related stress and turnover
intentions (Gould-Williams et al., 2015; Jin et al., 2018;
de Lara, 2008). Person-organization fit also negatively
affects public employee intent to quit in Indiana,
Kentucky, and Oregon in the US (Bright, 2008), or
intent to quit of teachers in India (Narayanan & Sekar,
2009), and civil servants in China (Liu et al., 2010).
Similarly, Person-organization fit is associated with the
mental well-being of Asian employees working in the
United States; and there is a significant negative effect of
Person-organization fit on organizational stress levels of
hotel managers in Turkey (Iplik et al., 2011). Given the
existing arguments and empirical findings, we hypothe­
size that:
H6: The level of person-organization fit is associated
with a higher level of (a) work- efforts and (b) organiza­
tional citizenship behavior; and associated with a lower
level of (c) work-related stress and (d) turnover inten­
tions of public employees at Vietnamese public
universities.
The mediated role of person-organization fit on the
public service motivation – employee outcomes
relations
Many studies strive to incorporate the mediated role of
person-organization fit in the relationship between PSM
and employees’ attitudes and behaviors. A study by
Wright and Pandey (2008) contributes to our under­
standing of the mechanisms through which PSM
increases the value fit between employees and their
organization, which in turn relates to employee’s atti­
tude. Particularly, the relationship between PSM and job
satisfaction is mediated by the extent of the employee-
organization value congruence. In addition, both the
direct effect of PSM on employee attitudes (i.e., satisfac­
tion and commitment) and the indirect effect mediated
by person-organization fit in an empirical test for self-
reported survey data on public servants in Korea (Kim,
2012). Furthermore, person-organization fit explains
a high proportion of mediation in the association
between PSM and stress, and the PSM-turnover inten­
tions relation, but only a low proportion in the relation­
ship between PSM and organizational citizenship
behavior (Gould-Williams et al., 2015).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 7
Although Jin et al. (2018) argue that the greater the
person-organization fit individuals experience, the
higher the performance effort they will demonstrate in
public organizations, they cannot provide evidence sup­
porting the mediated role of person-organization fit on
the PSM and organizational citizenship behavior rela­
tion. Similarly, Leisink and Steijn (2009) point out that
PSM appears to have no indirect effect on employee
outcomes, namely commitment, willingness to exert
effort, and job performance when person-organization
fit is considered as mediating the linkage. Additionally,
there is a significant positive effect of PSM on person-
organization fit and of person-organization fit on job
performance, but no significant effect of PSM on per­
formance when the person-organization fit is taken into
account (Bright, 2008). Due to the inconsistent findings
in the literature, this study aims to supplement
a comprehensive understanding of the mediated role of
person-organization fit. We hypothesize that:
H7: PSM will have an indirect effect on (a) work effort,
(b) organizational citizenship behavior, (c) work-related
stress, and (d) turnover intention through the mediating
of person-organization fit.
Drawing the above predictions, our conceptual model
is outlined in Figure 1.
Research methodology
Sample
The target population for this study comprises faculty
and staff in the Vietnamese public universities, where
contain abundant and valuable data sources for
researching PSM. Our data are based on a random sam­
ple of 313 faculty and staff drawn from 45 public uni­
versities in Vietnam. Our results will be representative
because these selective public universities are quite dif­
ferent which come from the South, the Central, and the
North of Vietnam even though they only account for
nearly 30% of the total number of public universities
nationwide.
Construct measure
A quantitative survey questionnaire was built, including
all of the questions involved in this research, adapted
from the previous research and modified to fit the con­
text of PSM in Vietnam. The form of all items of the
survey questionnaire includes statements with which all
respondents are to disagree or agree on a Likert-type
scale with five choices ranging from totally disagree to
8 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.

H5 (+) Personal-Organization Fit H6

(POF)

Public Service Motivation Employee Outcomes (EO)

(PSM)
H1 (+)
Work Effort (WEF)
Self-Sacrifice (SSF)

H2 (+) Organizational
Commitment to the Citizenship Behaviors
(OCBs)
Public Interest (CPI)
H3 (-)
Attraction to Public Turnover Intention (TIT)

Policy Making (PPM)

H4 (-)
Compassion (CPS) Work-Related Stress
(WRS)

Figure 1. Research framework.

totally agree. Table 1 describes the development of the
list of items in each construct.
The level of validity and reliability is a prerequisite for
assessing the suitability of the items. Firstly, we define
the factors related to the model, which serve the analysis
in this study. At the same time, we review all relevant
documents to find questions that accurately represent
the items. Moreover, to prepare clarity for the question­
naire, we sent it to experts to get corrected suggestions
on the questionnaire’s content. The experts’ improve­
ment in the questionnaire was included in the second
questionnaire version. Besides, we have also run pilot
tests with over 100 participants to check whether the
items match the model predicted in this study.
Method
Our analysis follows a two-step procedure. First, the data
analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS analysis
(release 22.0) and then using IBM SPSS Amos (version
20.0). In there, SPSS software adopted to explain social
demographics, characteristics of participants, explora­
tory factor analysis, reliability, mean and standard devia­
tion, while Amos used to examine the central hypotheses
by the covariance-based structural equation modeling
(CB-SEM). Many researchers in various disciplines
such as management, business, or economics choose
covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) or full SEM because
of their ability to evaluate complex relationships using
a parametric statistical approach (Khongmalai &
Distanont, 2017; Putri et al., 2017; Smaliukienė et al.,
2017). Generally, Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)
is a statistical tool that simultaneously estimates the
multiple regression equations in a model fit, examining
the causal-effect relationships between observations and
latent variables.
Results
Descriptive analysis
To test our conceptual model, we randomly collect data
from 313 participants working in 45 public universities
in Vietnam. Of the total respondents, 51.5% were male;
7.7% of the respondents were between 20 and 29 in age,
54.6% were between 30 and 39, and the remainder were
above 40. A total of 77.7% of respondents had tenure
between 2 years and 15 years, 9.2% less than 2 years’
tenure, and 16.9% of working for more than 15 years. As
described in Table 2a, mainly survey participants are
lecturers (accounting for more than 60%), who directly
serve public service such as education; and can know
Table 1. Definition and measurement of studied variables.
Constructs Definition
Public Service
Motivation
Personal-Organizational POF is widely understood as the compatibility [POF1] My organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in Cable and DeRue (2002); Edwards (1991);
Fit of employees and their organizations
achieved when the goal or value of these
two parties coincides with each other or
both parties satisfy the demands of each
other (Kim, 2012; Jin et al., 2018).
Work Effort “Work effort refers to the amount of physical
and mental energy devoted to work and is
different from the skill and responsibility
requirements of a given job and the particular
constellation of skills and experience a worker
brings to it” (Bielby & Bielby, 1988).
Organizational OCB is widely known as voluntary and informal [OCB1] I go out of my way to help new employees
Citizenship Behavior behaviors of employees which contributes
to the effective operation of the
organization and promotes the
performance of public service regardless of
receiving recognition or not (Organ, 1988a;
Gould-Williams et al., 2015; Jin et al., 2018
Turnover Intentions Turnover Intention refers to the degree to
which public servants are consciously and
deliberately willing to quit their job at the
public organization (Maffei, 2019).
Work-related Stress Work-related stress appears in the situation
when individuals perceived that the job
requirements exceed their knowledge,
proficiency, and resources (Gould-Williams
et al., 2015; Bao & Zhong, 2021).
Measuring items Sources
[The Self-sacrifice] Perry James (1996); Kim (2012);
[SSF1] Making a difference in society means more to me than personal achievements.
[SSF2] I am prepared to make enormous sacrifices for the good of society.
[SSF3] I believe in putting duty before self.
[The Attraction to Public-policy Making]
[PPM1] I am interested in making public programs that are beneficial for my country or
the community I belong to.
[PPM2] Sharing my views on public policies with others is attractive to me.
[PPM3] Seeing people get benefits from the public program I have been deeply involved
in brings me a great deal of satisfaction.
[The Commitment to The Public Interest]
[CPI1] I consider public service my civic duty.
[CPI2] Meaningful public service is very important to me.
[CPI3] I would prefer seeing public officials do what is best for the whole community even
if it harmed my interests.
[The Compassion]
[CPS1] It is difficult for me to contain my feelings when I see people in distress.
[CPS2] I am often reminded by daily events how dependent we are on one another.
[CPS3] I feel sympathetic to the plight of the underprivileged.
life Piasentin and Chapman (2006)
[POF2] The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization
values
[POF3] My organization meets my major needs well.
[POF4] My values match those of current employees in this organization.
[POF5] My values match those of current employees in this organization.
[WEF1] I stay late if it is necessary to help out. Gould-Williams (2003); Leisink and Steijn (2009)
[WEF2] I never avoid extra duties and responsibility.
[WEF3] I seek out training and other ways of improving my performance at work
Boyd et al. (2018); Gould-Williams et al. (2015);
[OCB2] I help others who have heavy workload Kim, S. (2006)
[OCB3] I offer ideas to improve the functioning of the organization
[OCB4] I conserve and protect organizational property
[OCB5] I defend the organization when other employees criticize it
[TIT1] I don’t intend to remain with this organization for long. Gould-Williams et al. (2015).
[TIT2] I have seriously thought about leaving this
organization.
[TIT3] I would prefer another more ideal job to the
one I have now.
[WRS1] I feel a great deal of stress because of my job Gould-Williams et al. (2015).
[WRS2] Very stressful things happen to me at work
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
[WRS3] My job is extremely stressful
9
10 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.

Table 2a. Demographic characteristics of respondents (n = 313). Factor loading and Cronbach’s alpha
Frequency Percentage (%)
This article relies on Narasimhan and Jayaram (1998)
Gender
• Male 161 51.5% to conduct the construct validity in two steps, includ­
• Female 152 48.5% ing unidimensional and convergent validity. A set of
Age
• 20 – 29 24 7.7% observable variables measuring only a latent variable is
• 30 – 39 171 54.6% a prerequisite for unidimensional validity (O’Leary-
• 40 – 49 94 30%
• 50 – 59 19 6.2%
Kelly & Vokurka, 1998). Exploratory factor analysis
• >60 5 1.5% (EFA) along with varimax rotation indicators, princi­
Position pal axis factoring, and extracting factors with eigenva­
• Lecturers 209 66.9%
• Office Staff 46 14.6% lues more significant than one considered as
• Managerial Staff 53 16.9% unidimensional validity (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).
• Other 5 1.5%
Tenure Thanks to Hair et al. (2013), we determine that the
• Smaller than 2 years 29 9.2% loading threshold of factor loading must be greater
• 2 – 5 years 41 13.1%
• 5 – 10 years 99 31.5% than or equal to 0.5 representing a 25% variance for
• 10 – 15 years 91 29.3% each factor, which qualifies to consider a practical sig­
• More than 15 years 53 16.9%
nificance level. After obtaining the result of EFA,
N = 313
observed variables that do not meet the following con­
dition will be removed: (1) no significant practical
and understand PSM carefully. The descriptive statistics significance on any factor, (2) factor loading is too
of nine factors with 31 items are reported in Table 2b. low, (3) factor loading that represents two or more
Descriptions of all items are shown with mean, std – factors (Hair et al., 2013). An observed variable per­
deviation, min, and max. Table 2b shows that Public forms less than 0.5-factor loading (OCB1: I assist
Service Motivation (PSM) consists of Self-Sacrifice others with their duties); it will not be considered for
(SSF), Commitment to the Public Interest (CPI), further analysis to ensure the quality of the measure­
Attraction to Public Policy Making (PPM), and ment. As can be seen in Table 3, which illustrates the
Compassion (CPS) received an average rating of over number of factor-loading and Cronbach’s alpha ranges
four from 313 samples in Vietnam. from 0.5 (TIT3) to 0.865 (PPM2).

Table 2b. Descriptive statistics.

Construct/Item N Min. Max. Mean Std. Dev.
Public Service Motivation (PSM) Self-Sacrifice (SSF) SSF1 313 1 5 4.173 0.871
SSF2 313 1 5 4.029 0.9142
SSF3 313 1 5 4.272 0.8509
Commitment to the Public Interest (CPI) CPI1 313 2 5 4.415 0.6455
CPI2 313 2 5 4.169 0.8126
CPI3 313 2 5 4.313 0.8307
Attraction to Public Policy Making (PPM) PPM1 313 2 5 4.428 0.6714
PPM2 313 2 5 4.153 0.8256
PPM3 313 1 5 4.268 0.8576
Compassion (CPS) CPS1 313 2 5 4.55 0.6392
CPS2 313 1 5 4.342 0.8015
CPS3 313 1 5 4.351 0.8152
Personal-Organizational Fit (POF) POF1 313 1 5 4.131 0.8579
POF2 313 1 5 4.118 0.9034
POF3 313 1 5 4.121 0.8462
POF4 313 1 5 4.173 0.7859
POF5 313 2 5 4.281 0.7365
Employee Outcome (ECO) Work-Effort (WEF) WEF1 313 2 5 4.454 0.7459
WEF2 313 2 5 4.268 0.8075
WEF3 313 2 5 4.358 0.7423
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) OCB1 313 2 5 4.224 0.825
OCB2 313 2 5 4.403 0.7409
OCB3 313 2 5 4.479 0.6653
OCB4 313 2 5 4.588 0.6249
OCB5 313 2 5 4.284 0.804
Turnover Intention (TIT) TIT1 313 1 5 3.754 1.121
TIT2 313 1 5 3.786 1.0357
TIT3 313 1 5 3.556 1.021
Work-Related Stress (WRS) WRS1 313 1 5 3.757 1.126
WRS2 313 1 5 3.722 1.1967
WRS3 313 1 5 3.709 1.1637
N – no. of obs. (listwise) 313
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 11

Table 3. Factor loading and Cronbach’s alpha.

Factor loading
Factor Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Cronbach’s alpha
Self-Sacrifice SSF1 .582 .747
SSF2 .743
SSF3 .763
Commitment to the Public Interest CPI1 .718 .680
CPI2 .638
CPI3 .601
Attraction to Public Policy Making PPM1 .658 .738
PPM2 .865
PPM3 .595
Compassion CPS1 .577 .602
CPS2 .638
CPS3 .518
Personal-Organizational Fit POF1 .574 .746
POF2 .554
POF3 .625
POF4 .669
POF5 .606
Work-Effort WEF1 .619 .609
WEF2 .556
WEF3 .537
Organizational Citizenship Behavior OCB2 .630 .798
OCB3 .731
OCB4 .598
OCB5 .731
Turnover Intention TIT1 .587 .601
TIT2 .548
TIT3 .500
Work-Related Stress WRS1 .623 .625
WRS2 .654
WRS3 .524

The number of factor loading and Cronbach’s alpha

shown in Table 3 shows that self-sacrifice contains three-
parameter [SSF-1]-[SSF-3] with EFA loading value between
0.582 and 0.763. The next factor is appropriate in the
commitment to the public interest with CPI1, CPI2, and
CPI3 through the value from 0.718, 0.638, and 0.601. The
third factor indicates PPM1, PPM3, and PPM3, following
the corresponding values 0.658, 0.865, and 0.595. [CPS1] –
[CPS3] are owned by competitive intensity, which gives the
significant value in Table 2a, from 0.518 to 0.638. Factor 5 is
described as a personal-organizational fit, involving three
parameters [POF1] – [POF5] presenting in the results of
EFA loading of 0.554 to 0.669. The next three factors pre­
sent WEF1, WEF2, and WEF3, with the factor loading from
0.537 to 0.619. Furthermore, organizational citizenship
behavior consists of four parameters, which are OCB2,
OCB3, OCB4, and OCB5, with the EFA loading of 0.598
to 0.731. The last two factors are turnover intention and
work-related stress, respectively, each with a load factor
greater than 0.5. Besides, the eigenvalues for the eight
factors are above 1.065, and the cumulative explained var­
iance is 61,231%. A Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) statistic of
0.736 confirmed the items’ suitability since KMO values
greater than 0.60 can be considered adequate for applying
factor analysis (Hair et al., 2013).
Confirm factor analysis (CFA)
As a general process, investigating the validity of
a measurement model is the next step, and using con­
vergent validity to evaluate. Based on Ylinen and
Gullkvist (2014), the two average variances extracted
(AVE) and composite reliability (CR) indicators are
used to confirm the convergent validity. Measuring the
reliability and consistency of the measurement variables
expressed through the CR and AVE measures the con­
vergence between a set of question items representing
a latent variable (Ambad & Wahab, 2016). CR is calcu­
lated by all observed variables of a latent variable and is
eligible to hold when exceeding 0.6 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988).
The CR values for SSF, CPI, PPM, CPS, POF, WEF,
OCB, TIT, and WRS constructs were 0.747, 0.680,
0.738, 0.602, 0.746, 0.609, 0.798, 0.601, and 0.625,
respectively, which satisfies the conditions of CR. Also,
the condition that satisfies AVE should be higher than
0.5, but when CR is higher than 0.6 and AVE is less than
0.5, the convergence validity is still accepted (Fornell &
Larcker, 1981). In Table 4, there are CR and AVE factors
of nine factors, showing that CR exceeds the minimum
threshold of 0.6, and AVE is less than 0.5, the conver­
gence validity is established.
12 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.

Table 4. Standardized regression weight, CR and AVE.

Standardized Regression Error Item Composite Reliability Average Variance Extracted
Factor Code Weight Variance R-square (CR) (AVE)
Self-Sacrifice SSF1 .617 .619 .381 .754 .510
SSF2 .822 .324 .676
SSF3 .687 .528 .472
Commitment to the Public CPI1 .695 .517 .483 .687 .427
Interest CPI2 .719 .483 .517
CPI3 .529 .720 .280
Attraction to Public Policy PPM1 .632 .601 .399 .756 .517
Making PPM2 .895 .199 .801
PPM3 .592 .650 .350
Compassion CPS1 .586 .657 .343 .610 .343
CPS2 .606 .633 .367
CPS3 .564 .682 .318
Personal-Organizational Fit POF1 .596 .645 .355 .750 .376
POF2 .558 .689 .311
POF3 .661 .563 .437
POF4 .620 .616 .384
POF5 .625 609 .391
Work-Effort WEF1 .513 .737 .263 .612 .346
WEF2 .629 .604 .396
WEF3 .616 .621 .379
Organizational Citizenship OCB2 .655 .571 .429 .801 .504
Behavior OCB3 .735 .460 .540
OCB4 .628 .606 .394
OCB5 .807 .349 .651
Turnover Intention TIT1 .529 .720 .280 .603 .337
TIT2 .596 .645 .355
TIT3 .612 .625 .375
Work-Related Stress WRS1 .573 .672 .328 .629 .366
WRS2 .715 .489 .511
WRS3 .509 .741 .259

Structural equation modeling (SEM) and tests of
hypotheses
Our structural model uses the following controls: gender,
age, tenure, and job position. After testing the model, we
find out that results were consistent both with and with­
out their inclusion in the model. Then, based on the
recommendations of Williams et al. (2009), we decide to
report our findings without controls because there were
no strong theoretical arguments for their inclusion.
In general, the proposed structural model provides
a good fit to the data (see Figure 2). With the fit index,
Figure 2 provides the relevance of the data set and the
analytical model. One of the measures is used to examine
the indexes chi-square (CMIN), chi-square to degrees of
freedom (CMIN/df) with p-value, root-mean-square error
of approximation (RMSEA), the goodness of fit index
(GFI), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), standardized
root-mean-square residual (SRMR) and the comparative fit
index (CFI). Figure 2 reflects the suitability and acceptable
level of the proposed model compared to the null model
when CFI passes 0.95 (Bentler, 1990; Hu & Bentler, 1999).
The RMSEA serves as an additional indicator, using
chi-square statistics to provide a method for adjusting
sample sizes, which are commonly applied in Structural
Equation Modeling. The conditions indicate a good fit
model when the RMSEA is presenting less than 0.06 values
(Browne & Cudeck, 1993). Additionally, the GFI finds
a good fit between the covariance matrix and the predictive
model; furthermore, the AGFI illustrates how the number
of observed variables influences the latent variable. The GFI
and AGFI value review ranges from 0 to 1, and Figure 2
shows the number of GFI is .891, generally indicating
acceptable model fit (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). The
final indicator to note is that SRMR provides the standar­
dized root-mean-square residual within the range of 0 to 1;
the SRMR is smaller than 0.08, indicating that the analytical
model is a good fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999).
Focusing on the direct effect of interest, the results in
Table 5 support Hypotheses H1 relating to the higher level
of PSM associated the extent to which employees’ work-
effort in the Vietnamese public universities. In a detailed
manner, as (H1b) the high the commitment to the public
interest of faculty and staff has a positive influence on their
work-effort (CPI -> WEF: t-value is 2.264, r = .189 and
p = .024) compared to (H1c) the high the attraction public
policy-making of faculty and staff has positive influence on
their work-effort (PPM -> WEF: t-value is 2.487, r = .126
and p = .013). However, the connection between the self-
sacrifice (H1a: r = .074 and p = .217) and compassion (H1d:
r = .052 and p > .1) with work-effort is not statistically
significant. Therefore, H1 are partially supported. Besides,
the level of self-sacrifice (H2a: r = .135, p = .013), commit­
ment to the public interest (H2b: r = .208, p = .013), attrac­
tion public policy-making (H2c: r = .121, p = .018), and
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 13

Figure 2. Structural equation model results.

Table 5. Structural equation model results.

Hypothesis 1 Standardized path coefficients S.E. t-Value p-value Outcome
H1a Self-Sacrifice -> Work Effort .074 .060 1.234 .217 Not support
H1b Commitment to the Public Interest -> Work Effort .189 .084 2.264 .024 Support
H1c Attraction Public Policy Making -> Work Effort .126 .050 2.487 .013 Support
H1d Compassion -> Work Effort .052 .106 .496 .620 Not support
Hypothesis 2
H2a Self-Sacrifice -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .135 .062 2.177 .029 Support
H2b Commitment to the Public Interest -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .208 .085 2.444 .015 Support
H2c Attraction Public Policy Making -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .121 .051 2.372 .018 Support
H2d Compassion -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .261 .113 2.307 .021 Support
Hypothesis 3
H3a Self-Sacrifice -> Turnover Intention −.136 .054 −2.496 .013 Support
H3b Commitment to the Public Interest -> Turnover Intention −.129 .073 −1.780 .075 Support
H3c Attraction Public Policy Making -> Turnover Intention −.099 .044 −2.252 .024 Support
H3d Compassion -> Turnover Intention .195 .098 2.004 .045 Support
Hypothesis 4
H4a Self-Sacrifice -> Work-Related Stress −.157 .086 −1.817 .069 Support
H4b Commitment to the Public Interest -> Work-Related Stress .106 .116 .916 .360 Not Support
H4c Attraction Public Policy Making -> Work-Related Stress .190 .072 2.636 .008 Support
H4d Compassion -> Work-Related Stress −.066 .151 −.435 .664 Not support
Hypothesis 5
H5a Self-Sacrifice -> Personal-Organizational Fit .150 .055 2.702 .007 Support
H5b Commitment to the Public Interest -> Personal-Organizational Fit .197 .076 2.608 .009 Support
H5c Attraction Public Policy Making -> Personal-Organizational Fit .087 .045 1.918 .055 Support
H5d Compassion -> Personal-Organizational Fit .195 .100 1.945 .052 Support
Hypothesis 6
H6a Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work-Effort .240 .094 2.570 .010 Support
H6b Personal-Organizational Fit -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .216 .094 2.302 .021 Support
H6c Personal-Organizational Fit -> Turn-over Intention −.195 .082 −2.386 .017 Support
H6d Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work-Related Stress −.363 .133 −2.724 .006 Support

compassion (H2d: r = .261, p = .021) are associated with the public employees’ intention to quit (H3) is also statistically
extent to which organizational citizen behavior in the significant. For hypothesis H3a, the results indicate that the
Vietnamese public higher education institution. The self-sacrifice of faculty and staff has negative influence on
hypothesized relationship of PSM on the Vietnamese their turnover-intention (SSF -> TIT: t-value is −2.496,
14 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.

r = −.136 and p = .013). Furthermore, the analysis also
confirms hypotheses H3b, H3c, (CPI -> TIT: r = −.129
and p = .075, PPM -> TIT: r = −.099 and p = .024, respec­
tively), but leaving H3d (CPS -> TIT: r = .195 and p = .045)
is unsupported as the sign of the effect are contrary to our
original hypothesis. This outcome partially supports H3
that the higher level of PSM associated the extent to
which employees’ intention to quit in public universities.
H4 deal with the reasonable in terms of self-sacrifice
(H4a: r = −.157, p = .069), commitment to the public
interest (H4b: r = .106, p > .1, not support), attraction public
policy-making (H4c: r = .190, p = .008), and compassion
(H4d: r = −.066, p > .1, not support) – i.e., whether the
higher level of PSM in Vietnam university lead to employ­
ees’ work-related stress. The outcomes determine that H4 is
partially supported.
In terms of indirect paths, the results demonstrate
that personal-organizational fit (POF) is a key driver of
employees’ outcome variables. Hypothesis 5 is totally
supported (as indicated in Table 6). Research results also
confirm the hypothesis related to the greater effects of
POF on employees’ outcomes in the Vietnamese public
higher education institutions. As our argument, the
greater level of Personal-Organizational Fit associated
to the higher extent of employees’ outcome, that is (H6a:
r = .240 and p < .01; H6b: r = .216 and p = .021; H6c:
r = −.195 and p = .017; H6d: r = −.363 and p = .006).
Hence, we assert that hypothesis 6 is validated. The
support of hypotheses 5 and 6 confirms the mediating
role of the personal-organizational fit. As demonstrated
results, PSM has significant positive effects on work-
effort and organizational citizenship behavior, and nega­
tive impacts on turnover intention, and work-related
stress via POF. Therefore, the results above support
our hypothesis 7. The coefficient associated with the
indirect path of PSM via POF to employee outcomes is
presented in Table 6.
Discussion and conclusion
PSM has been studied by scholars in different cultures
with various dimensions. Although a growing body of
research attempts to advance our understanding of the
link between PSM and employee outcomes via both indir­
ect and direct processes (Bright, 2008; Gould-Williams
et al., 2015; Kim, 2012; Palma, 2016; Wright & Pandey,
2008), these results have not yet reached a concrete con­
clusion. For instance, research emerging from the United
States has supported the notion that PSM only affects
employee performance through personal-organizational
fit (POF) (Bright, 2008; Wright & Pandey, 2008). Several
studies have found that both direct and indirect effects of
PSM (via POF) on employee outcomes (Gould-Williams
et al., 2015; Kim, 2012) in the context of Korea and Egypt.
Also, Gould-Williams et al. (2015) suggest that the influ­
ence of POF varied depending on the employee outcome
being tested. In the meanwhile, the findings from meta-
analytic studies of POF showed that the influence was
more substantial for behaviors than for attitudes
(Hoffman & Woehr, 2006; Verquer et al., 2003).
Notably, the effect of PSM on employee performance
varies according to different performance goals (Wright
& Pandey, 2008). However, recent research criticized that
PSM literature lacks diversity in the studied sample. As
Christensen & Wright (2011) noted, the PSM study does
not conduct equally to servants across public sectors.
Previous mediation analysis mainly focuses on samples
of government workers, which blurred the processes
through which PSM links to employee outcomes in
a specific job function context (Jin et al., 2018).
Therefore, our study addresses these research gaps by
analyzing a sample of faculty and staff in the case of
Vietnamese public universities, whose job outcome cri­
teria may be as diverse as the number of people defining
them. We aim to examine how different aspects of PSM
affect employee behaviors and work attitudes in terms of

Table 6. The indirect path of PSM via POF to employee outcomes.

Indirect effect (Hypotheses 7)
Self-Sacrifice -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work Effort .036* [.007,.099]
Self-Sacrifice -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .032† [.001,.093]
Self-Sacrifice -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Turnover Intention −.029† [−.083,-.002]
Self-Sacrifice -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work-Related Stress −.054* [−.013,.042]
Commitment to the Public Interest -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work Effort .047* [.145,.018]
Commitment to the Public Interest -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .043† [.124,.065]
Commitment to the Public Interest -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Turnover Intention −.038* [−.010,.046]
Commitment to the Public Interest -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work-Related Stress −.072† [−.006,.063]
Attraction Public Policy Making -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work Effort .021† [.001,.058]
Attraction Public Policy Making -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .019 [.000,.069]
Attraction Public Policy Making -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Turnover Intention −.017† [−.001,.081]
Attraction Public Policy Making -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work-Related Stress −.032† [−.001,.078]
Compassion -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work Effort .047* [.010,.184]
Compassion -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Organizational Citizen Behavior .042† [.003,.161]
Compassion -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Turnover Intention −.038† [−.606,-.002]
Compassion -> Personal-Organizational Fit -> Work-Related Stress −.071† [−.364,-.011]

work effort, organizational citizenship behavior, work
stress, and turnover intention. Simultaneously, we also
investigate the role of POF as an intermediary variable
in the PSM–outcomes relationship in Vietnamese public
higher education institutions.
Our research reveals several significant findings. First,
the empirical test reports different results in the direct
link between PSM aspects and employee outcomes.
Accordingly, we observe inconsistent results in the rela­
tionship between the four dimensions of PSM and work
effort. Our data validate the assumption that public
employees in universities who commit to the public
interest and are attracted to public policy-making will
exert more effort in their work, but leaving the direct
effects of self-sacrifice and compassion on work effort is
not supported. It can be argued that self-sacrifice and
compassion are the permanent characteristics of each
Vietnamese person (Toan, 2016); hence, commitment to
the public interest and public policy-making attraction
appear to be a stronger effect on the work effort of public
employees. Remarkably, we find that all dimensions of
PSM have direct effects on organizational citizenship
behavior (OCB) (H2). In other words, faculty and staff
in the Vietnamese public universities who have high
PSM including self-sacrifice, passion, commitment to
public organizations, and public policy-making attrac­
tion are more likely to be associated with the perfor­
mance of OCB than individuals with low PSM. This is in
line with the finding of Gould-Williams et al. (2015),
reflecting OCB is an intra-organizational performance
of PSM. In addition, there is a significant direct negative
effect of PSM on turnover intention in terms of self-
sacrifice, commitment to the public interest, and attrac­
tion to policy-making. We advocate that the higher the
PSM level a public employee has, the lower their like­
lihood of quitting their job in the public sector.
However, the crucial of extrinsic motivation to mitigate
turnover intention maybe even more controversial given
the unexpected positive between compassion and turn­
over intention. In other words, the faculty and staff with
a higher level of compassion might be more tempted to
leave their university. Moreover, the hypothesis that
PSM has a negative effect directly on work-related stress
is only supported in the dimension of self-sacrifice
(H4a). Especially, we observe a statistically significant
effect of attraction to policy-making on work-related
stress, but the sign of the effect is not as our expectation
(H4c).
Second, the four dimensions of PSM have signifi­
cant positive relationships with POF, which in turn
positively impacts work effort and OCB, also nega­
tively impacts work-related stress and turnover inten­
tion. Consistent with recent findings, our results
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 15
highlight that POF is a crucial explanatory of employee
outcomes (Andersson et al., 2015; Gould-Williams
et al., 2015; Iplik et al., 2011). When employees’ values
and career goals are well fit with those of the organiza­
tion, they are more likely to result in positive outcomes
directed at both interpersonal and organizational
levels. In particular, they are more likely to exert effort
in work, increase the level of OCB, and be less likely to
have high pressure or intention to leave. As employees
believe their goals aligned with those of the public
universities, they tend to commit to their duty and
exert more effort in work to achieve the overall goals
of their institutions, which they perceive as their own.
It also results in their sense of belonging and identifi­
cation with the organization and their jobs, eventually
leading to their enduring emotional attachment to the
organization. Besides, our findings also support other
scholars’ arguments (Kim, 2012; Wright & Pandey,
2008) that PSM increases the value fit between employ­
ees and public higher education institutions. Notably,
commitment to the public interest and compassion has
the strongest effect on POF, followed by self-sacrifice
and attraction to policy-making. These findings may
reflect the composition of our sample (faculty and staff
in public higher education institutions) who are more
likely to be emotionally attached to their service reci­
pients. Traditionally, employees in public higher edu­
cation institutions always are admired and respected in
Vietnamese society. This is considered a noble profes­
sion in incubating and mentoring an entirely new
generation of young adults. Therefore, they are willing
to sacrifice their personal interests to accomplish the
goals of the organization. Conversely, if civil servants
or politicians are sampled, the aspect related to attrac­
tion to policy-making may have a stronger impact on
POF (Gould-Williams et al., 2015). Overall, the med­
iate role of POF is consistent across all PSM aspects
and outcome variables. This is in line with previous
studies that highlight the vital role of POF as
a mediator in the linkage between PSM and employee
outcomes (Gould-Williams et al., 2015; Kim, 2012).
Our findings also give several implications for public-
sector managers in Vietnam. First, among the four
dimensions of PSM, commitment to the public interest
and public policy-making attraction appear to be
a stronger effect on the work effort of public employees.
Both these two dimensions of PSM involve a unique
sense of civic duty as integral stakeholders in the policy
process. It can be argued that the desire to serve in the
public interest and participate in the formulation of
public policy has been put on priority by faculty and
staff in Vietnamese public universities. As professions
with a high level of critical thinking, they also have the
16 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.
need to express individual views for community benefit
and social development and reinforce their image of self-
importance. Thereafter, public managers should facili­
tate employees to have a more genuine voice in public
policy decisions, especially in higher education policy.
Second, achieving the congruence between employees’
and public universities’ values is very crucial to result in
positive outcomes directed at both interpersonal and orga­
nizational levels as well as internalize the values and goals of
the public sector. Hence, public managers should consider
PSM as a basis to examine and select suitable candidates
from a beginning recruiting strategy because PSM may be
improved by appropriate selection process and socialization
to organization values. Third, faculty and staff with a high
level of PSM are more likely to have high work effort and
are also less likely to get stress involving work or have the
intention to quit the job. Simultaneously, having these
employees is important to strengthen OCB in public orga­
nizations. Thus, managers should ensure that faculty and
staff are provided with effective programs to reinforce their
identification of the mission, goals, objectives, and norms of
public universities as well as have a comprehensive under­
standing of the ways to serve the public interest through
making public policies and delivering public services.
Instead of considering extrinsic reward motivators like
high income, public employees with a high level of PSM
are more likely to place a higher value on intrinsic rewards
such as feeling of work accomplishment or a sense of doing
something worthwhile. This can be achieved by improving
the incentive structures of public universities to offer
employees more opportunities to satisfy their PSM
(Houston, 2006). Additionally, to better manage and pro­
mote the relationship between organizational commitment
and OCB and to retain these employees, public managers
must launch the strategic use of intrinsic incentives to
recognize employees’ sentiment and affective commitment
for their universities.
Finally, a number of important limitations need to be
considered. This study may have some potential possi­
bilities of bias. There may have an argument to say that
participants over 40 years old in this survey might not
have many choices to work at private universities rather
than the younger ones because there were not many
available 20-25 years ago. In Vietnam, they also might
have had choices to work at both private and public
universities because private universities have been facili­
tated since 1985 based on the State policy of socialization
of education. However, we will consider this issue in
future research for comparison PSM of employees
between public- versus private-sector in Vietnamese
higher education institutions context. Additionally, the
reliance on self-reported measures with common
method bias cannot be ignored. In particular, although
items measure of Work Effort designed to capture public
employee discretionary effort is developed based on the
previous studies of Leisink and Steijn (2009), and
Gould-Williams (2003), the self-evaluated questionnaire
may measure the subjective perception of their work
effort, reflecting a possibility of bias. It is known that
common-rater bias inflates effect sizes, particularly for
attitude–attitude relationships. Therefore, we will
attempt to find independent and objective Work Effort
indicators for further research.
Funding
This article is a product of the CS/2020-02 project, which is
funded by the University of Economics and Law (VNU-HCM).
ORCID
Trinh Hoang Hong Hue http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3725-
1773
Huy-Cuong Vo Thai http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1969-
4615
My-Linh Tran http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8885-7858
References
Ambad, S. N. A., & Wahab, K. A. (2016). The relationship
between corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance:
Evidence from Malaysian large companies. International
Journal of Business and Society, 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.
33736/ijbs.524.2016
Andersen, L. B., & Kjeldsen, A. M. (2013). Public service
motivation, user orientation, and job satisfaction:
A question of employment sector? International Public
Management Journal, 16(2), 252–274. doi:https://doi.org/
10.1080/10967494.2013.817253
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation
modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step
approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://
doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Andersson, O., Huysentruyt, M., Miettinen, T., & Stephan, U.
(2015). Person-organization fit and incentives: A causal test.
Management Science, 61(11), 2603–2610. https://doi.org/10.
1287/mnsc.2015.2331
Andrews, R., & Mostaf, A. M. S. (2019). Organizational goal
ambiguity and senior public managers’ engagement: Does
organizational social capital make a difference?
International Review of Administrative Sciences, 85(2),
377–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852317701824
Bagozzi, R., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structure
equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Bakker, A. B. (2015). A job demands–resources approach to
public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 75
(5), 723–732. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12388
Bao, Y., & Zhong, W. (2021). Public service motivation mat­
ters: Examining the differential effects of challenge and
hindrance stressors on organizational identification and

turnover intention. Public Management Review, 23(4), 546–
566. https://doi.org/10.108
Battaglio, J. R. (2015). Chapter 8: Managing motivation in the
public service. In R. P. Jr (Ed.), Public human resource
management strategies and practices in the 21st century
(pp. 217–241). SAGE.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural
models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Bielby, D. D., & Bielby, W. T. (1988). She works hard for the
money: Household responsibilities and the allocation of
work effort. American Journal of Sociology, 93(5),
1031–1059. https://doi.org/10.1086/228863
Binh, L. (2019). Kinh tế tư nhân trước yêu cầu đổi mới mô
hình tăng trưởng. Thời báo Ngân hàng, Retrieved from
Thời báo Ngân hàng, https://thoibaonganhang.vn/kinh-te-
tu-nhan-truoc-yeu-cau-doi-moi-mo-hinh-tang-truong-
87418.html
Boyd, N., Nowell, B., Yang, Z., & Hano, M. C. (2018). Sense of
community, sense of community responsibility, and public
service motivation as predictors of employee well-being and
engagement in public service organizations. American
Review of Public Admin Administration, 48(5), 428–443.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074017692875
Bright, L. (2007). Does person-organization fit mediate the
relationship between public service motivation and the job
performance of public employees? Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 27(9), 361–3637. https://doi.
org/doi:10.1177/0734371X07307149
Bright, L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make
a difference on the job satisfaction and turnover intentions
of public employees? The American Review of Public
Administration, 38(2), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0275074008317248
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of
assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen ed. In Testing structural
equation models (pp. 136–162). Sage.
Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and
discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 875. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0021-9010.87.5.875
Caplan, R. D. (1987). Person-environment fit theory and orga­
nizations: Commensurate dimensions, time perspectives, and
mechanisms. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31(3), 248–267.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(87)90042-X
Cerase, F. P. (2009). Public service motivation: how does it
relate to management reforms and changes in the working
situation of public organizations? A case study of the Italian
revenue agency. Public Policy and Administration, 24(3),
281–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076709103812
Choi, Y., & Chung, I. H. (2018). Effects of public service
motivation on turnover and job satisfaction in the
U.S. teacher labor market. International Journal of Public
Administration, 41(3), 172–180. doi:https://doi.org/10.
1080/01900692.2016.1256306
Christensen, R. K., & Wright, B. E. (2011). The effects of public
service motivation on job choice decisions: Disentangling
the contributions of person-organization fit and person-job
fit. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
21(4), 723–743. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq085
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 17
Clarke, S. G., & Cooper, C. L. (2000). The risk management of
occupational stress. Health, Risk & Society, 2(2), 173–187.
https://doi.org/10.1080/713670158
de Lara, P. Z. (2008). Should faith and hope be included in the
employees’ agenda? Linking P-O fit and citizenship beha­
vior. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(1), 73–88.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810849675
Edwards, J. R. (1991). Person-job fit: A conceptual integration,
literature review, and methodological critique. In C. L.
Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of
industrial and organizational psychology, 6 (pp. 283–357).
John Wiley & Sons.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural
equation models with unobservable variables and measure­
ment error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Giauque, D., Anderfuhren-Biget, S., & Varone, F.
(2013). Stress perception in public organisations:
expanding the job demands–job resources model by
including public service motivation. Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 33(1), 58–83. https://doi.org/
doi:10.1177/0734371X12443264
Gould-Williams, J. (2003). The importance of HR practices
and workplace trust in achieving superior performance:
A study of public-sector organizations. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1), 28–54.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/095851902101
Gould-Williams, J., Bottomley, P., Redman, T., Snape, E.,
Bishop, D. J., Limpanitgul, T., & Mostafa, A. M. S. (2013).
Civic duty and employee outcomes: Do high commitment
human resource practices and work overload matter? Public
Administration, 92(4), 937–953. doi:https://doi.org/10.
1111/padm.12019
Gould-Williams, J., Mostafa, A., & Bottomley, P. (2015).
Public service motivation and employee outcomes in the
Egyptian public sector: testing the mediating effect of
person-organization fit. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 25(2), 597–622. https://doi.org/10.
1093/jopart/mut053
Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the pro­
social fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence,
performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93(1), 48–58. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.93.1.48
GSO. (2017). The 2017 Labor force survey report. Ministry of
Planning and Investment, Ha Noi. https://www.gso.gov.vn/
default.aspx?tabid=512&idmid=5&ItemID=19514
Hair, J. F., Ringer, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least
squares structural equation modeling: rigorous applica­
tions, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range
Planning, 46(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.
01.001
Hanisch, K. A. (2002). The timing of thinking about quitting.
In Koslowsky & Krausz (Eds.)Voluntary employee withdra­
wal and inattendance (pp. 193–211). Springer.
Harari, M. B., Herst, D. E. L., Parola, H. R., & Carmona, B. P.
(2017). Organizational correlates of public service motiva­
tion: A meta-analysis of two decades of empirical research.
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27
(1), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muw056
18 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.
Ho, S. Q. (2015). Some issues of Vietnam values system. The
confernce on “the Vietnam value system in the period of indus­
trialization, modernization and international integration”.
Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2006). A quantitative review of
the relationship between person–organization fit and beha­
vioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3),
389–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.08.003
Houston, D. J. (2006). “Walking the walk” of public service
motivation: Public employees and charitable gifts of time,
blood, and money. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 16(1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.
1093/jopart/mui028
Hsieh, C. (2014). Burnout among public service workers: The
role of emotional labor requirements and job resources.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34(4), 379–402.
https://doi.org/doi::10.1177/0734371X12460554
Hsu, H., Chen, S., Yu, H., & Lou, J. (2010). Job stress, achieve­
ment motivation and occupational burnout among male
nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66(7), 1592–1601.
https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/jan.2010.66.issue-7
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit
indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional cri­
teria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling,
6(1), 1–55. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Iplik, F. N., Kilic, K. C., & Yalcin, A. (2011). The simultaneous
effects of person-organization and person job fit on Turkish
hotel managers. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 23(5), 644–661. https://doi.org/
10.1108/09596111111143386
Jin, M. H., McDonald, B., & Park, J. (2018). Does public
service motivation matter in public higher education?
Testing the theories of person–organization fit and organi­
zational commitment through a serial multiple mediation
model. American Review of Public Administration, 48(1),
82–97. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016652243
Kahn, W. A. (1993). Caring for the caregivers: Patterns of
organizational caregiving. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 38(4), 539–563. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393336
Khongmalai, O., & Distanont, A. (2017). Corporate govern­
ance model in Thai state-owned enterprises: Structural
equation modelling approach. Corporate Governance, 17
(4), 613–628.
Kim, S. (2004). Individual-level factors and organizational
performance in government organizations. Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(2),
245–261. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui013
Kim, S. (2006). Public service motivation and organizational
citizenship behavior in Korea. International Journal of
Manpower,27(8), 722–740. https://doi.org/10.1108/
01437720610713521
Kim, S. (2012). Does person-organization fit matter in the public
sector? Testing the mediating effect of person-organization fit
in the relationship between public service motivation and
work attitudes. Public Administration Review, 72(6),
830–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02572.x
Kokubun, K. K. (2017). Organizational commitment and
rewards in Vietnam, with comparison between university
graduates and others. Asian Social Science, 13(8), 157.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v13n8p157
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative
review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and
implications. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C.
(2005). Consequences of individuals’fit at work: A meta
analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–
group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58
(2), 281–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.
00672.x
Langton, N., Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2016). Organizational
Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies, Applications, p.92 (7th
Canadian Ed.). Toronto: Pearson Education Canada Inc.
Lee, C. H., & Bruvold, N. T. (2003). Creating value for employ­
ees: Investment in employee development. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(6), 981–1000.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0958519032000106173
Leisink, P., & Steijn, B. (2009). Public service motivation and job
performance of public sector employees in the Netherlands.
International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(1), 35–52.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852308099505
Liu, B., Liu, J., & Hu, J. (2010). person–organization fit, job
satisfaction, and turnover intention: An empirical study in
the Chinese public sector. Social Behavior and Personality:
An International Journal, 38(5), 615–625. https://doi.org/
10.2224/sbp.2010.38.5.615
Liu, B., Tang, L., & Yang, K. (2015). When does public service
motivation fuel the job satisfaction fire? The joint modera­
tion of person-organization fit and needs-supplies fit. Public
Management Review, 17(6), 876–900. https://doi.org/10.
1080/14719037.2013.867068
Liu, B., Yang, K., & Yu, W. (2014). Work-related stressors and
health-related outcomes in public service: Examining the
role of public service motivation. American Review of Public
Administration, 45(5), 653–673. doi:https://doi.org/10.
1177/0275074014524298
Luu, T. (2016). How servant leadership nurtures knowledge
sharing: The mediating role of public service motivation.
International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(1),
91–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-06-2015-0112
Luu, T. (2018). Behind the influence of job crafting on citizen
value co-creation with the public organization: Joint effects
of paternalistic leadership and public service motivation.
Public Management Review, 20(10), 1533–1561. https://
doi.org/doi:10.1080/14719037.2018.1430247
Maffei, M. E. (2019). The relationship between public service
motivation and turnover intent : Influence of leader-member
exchange, job demands and resources, and employee genera­
tions. Faculty of the California School of Professional
Psychology.
McHugh, M., & Brennan, S. (1994). Managing the stress of
change in the public sector. International Journal of Public
Sector Management, 7(5), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09513559410067500
MOET. (2020, April 28). Higher education statistics for the
school year 2018-2019. https://moet.gov.vn/thong-ke
/Pages/thong-ko-giao-duc-dai-hoc.aspx
Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2007). The role of organizations
in fostering public service motivation. Public Administration
Review, 67(1), 40–53. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.
2006.00695 .
Naff, K. C., & Crum, J. (1999). Working for America: Does
public service motivation make a difference? Review of

Public Personnel Administration, 19(4), 5–16. doi:https://
doi.org/10.1177/0734371X9901900402
Narasimhan, R., & Jayaram, J. (1998). Causal linkages in
supply chain management: An exploratory study of
NorthAmerican manufacturing firms. Decision Sciences, 29
(3), 79–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.
tb01355.x
Narayanan, S. S., & Sekar, P. C. (2009). A person-organisation
fit study of college work culture and its impact on beha­
vioural intentions of teachers. Asia Pacific Management
Review, 14(2), 121–136.
Nguyen, P. (2017). Using PSM model to measure factors
affecting employee’s motivation in public sector. Vietnam
Trade and Industry Review, 13, 103–109.
O’Leary-Kelly, S. W., & Vokurka, R. J. (1998). The empirical
assessment of construct validity. Journal of Operations
Management, 16(4), 387–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0272-6963(98)00020-5
Organ, D. W. (1988a). Organizational citizenship behavior:
The good soldier syndrome. exington Books/DC Heath and
Com.
Organ, D. W. (1988b). Issues in organization and manage­
ment series. In D. C. Com (Ed.), Organizational citizenship
behavior: The good soldier syndrome (p. 4). Lexington
Books.
Palma, R. (2016). Public service motivation and employee
outcomes in the Italian public sector: Testing the mediating
effect of person-organization fit. Journal of Applied
Quantitative Methods, 11(2), 1–16.
Pandey, S. J., & Stazyk, E. C. (2008). Antecedents and corre­
lates of public service motivation. In J. P. Hondeghem (Ed.),
Motivation in public management: The call of public service
(pp. 101–17). Oxford University Press.
Pandey, S. K., Wright, B. E., & Moynihan, D. P. (2008).
Public service motivation and interpersonal citizenship
behavior in public organizations: Testing a preliminary
model. International Public Management Journal, 11(1),
89–108. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/109674908018879
Park, J., & Lee, K. H. (2020). Organizational politics, work
attitudes and performance: The moderating role of age and
public service motivation (PSM). International Review of
Public Administration, 25(2), 85–105. doi:https://doi.org/
10.1080/12294659.2020.1750755
Pedersen, L. H. (2014). Committed to the public interest?
Motivation and behavioural outcomes among local
councillors. Public Administration, 92(4), 886–901. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02107
Perry, J. L., & Hondeghem, A. (2008). Building theory and
empirical evidence about public service motivation.
International Public Management Journal, 11(1), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10967490801887673
Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of
public service. Public Administration Review, 5(3), 367–373.
https://doi.org/10.2307/976618
Perry James, L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation:
An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal
of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(1), 5–23.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024303
Piasentin, K. A., & Chapman, D. S. (2006). Subjective person–
organization fit: Bridging the gap between conceptualization
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 19
and measurement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(2),
202–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2006.05.001
Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., &
Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level
consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1),
122–141. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013079
Putri, N. T., Yusof, S. M., Hasan, A., & Darma, H. S. (2017).
A structural equation model for evaluating the relationship
between total quality management and employees’ produc­
tivity. International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 34(8), 1138–1151. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJQRM-10-2014-0161
Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public
organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
Ritz, A., Brewer, G. A., & Neumann, O. (2016). Public service
motivation: A systematic literature review and outlook. Public
Administration Review, 76(3), 414–442. doi:https://doi.org/10.
1111/puar.12505
Smaliukienė, R., Bekešienė, S., Chlivickas, E., & Magyla, M.
(2017). Explicating the role of trust in knowledge sharing:
A structural equation model test. Journal of Business
Economics and Management, 18(4), 758–778. https://doi.
org/10.3846/16111699.2017.1317019
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate
statistics. Allyn & Bacon.
Taylor, J. (2007). The impact of public service motives on work
outcomes in Australia: A comparative multi-dimensional
analysis. Public Administration, 85(4), 931–959. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00686.x
Teo, S., Pick, D., Xerri, M., & Newton, C. (2015). Person–
organization fit and public service motivation in the context
of change. Public Management Review 18(5), 1–23. https://
doi.org/doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1045016
Toan, L. (2016, February 2). Characteristics of Vietnamese culture.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02112.x. http://
lyluanchinhtri.vn/home/en/index.php/theory-research/item/
351-characteristics-of-vietnamese-culture.html
van Loon, N. M., Vandenabeele, W., & Leisink, P. (2015).
Clarifying the relationship between public service motiva­
tion and in-role and extra-role behaviors: The relative con­
tributions of person-job and person-organization fit.
American Review of Public Administration, 47(6),
699–713. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074015617547
Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., & Wagner, S. H. (2003).
A meta-analysis of relations between person–organiza­
tion fit and work attitudes. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 63(3), 473–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-
8791(02)00036-2
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Meisler, G. (2010). Emotions in manage­
ment and the management of emotions: The impact of
emotional intelligence and organizational politics on public
sector employees. Public Administration Review, 70(1),
72–86.
VnExpress. (2017, January 17). Two thirds of Vietnamese
graduates eye public sector jobs: Survey.https://e.vnex
press.net/news/news/two-thirds-of-vietnamese-gradu
ates-eye-public-sector-jobs-survey-3529264.html
VnExpress. (2019, December 24). Private sector should provide
public services: PM. https://e.vnexpress.net/news/business/
20 T. H. H. HUE ET AL.
economy/private-sector-should-provide-public-services-
pm-4032043.html
Wei, Y.-C. (2012). Person-organization fit and organizational citizenship
behavior: Time perspective. Journal of Management & Organization,
18(6), 833–844. https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2012.18.6.833
Williams, L. J., Vandenberg, R. J., & Edwards, J. R. (2009). Structural
equation modeling in management research: A guide for
improved analysis. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1),
543–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520903065683
Wright, B. E., & Pandey, S. K. (2008). Public service motivation
and the assumption of person—organization fit: Testing the
mediating effect of value congruence. Administration &
Society, 40(5), 502–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0095399708320187
Ylinen, M., & Gullkvist, B. (2014). The effects of organic and
mechanistic control in exploratory and exploitative
innovations. Management Accounting Research, 25(1),
93–112. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2013.05.001