Although meta-analytic evidence suggests that a greater fit between the person and the organization (P-O fit) is significantly related to a variety of positive work attitudes and contextual performance (Arthur, Bell, Villado, & Doverspike, 2006; Hoffman & Woehr, 2004, 2006; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005; Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner, 2003), the relationship between P-O fit and job performance has been inconsistent. In fact, Arthur and his colleagues argue that the lack of meta-analytic support should warrant the exclusion of P-O fit in selection because only criteria directly related to the job (i.e., job performance, not work attitudes) are deemed as appropriate criteria for selection (Civil Rights Act, 1964, 1991; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1978). This dissertation sought to explore this inconsistency by proposing and testing a mediated moderation model where the relationship between P-O fit and job performance is both moderated by climate strength and mediated by organizational commitment. The results indicate that P-O fit did not have any significant relationships with the study variables. However, organizational commitment was significantly related to perceptions of organizational climate quality as well as job performance. Although the proposed model was not supported, there are several methodological limitations for how P-O fit was conceptualized and measured that may be threats to construct validity. These limitations and other explanations for the findings are discussed.