Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6 (2013), 17–38. Copyright © 2013 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 1754-9426/13
COMMENTARIES
Employability and Career Success: The Need for Comprehensive Definitions of Career Success DEBORAH A. OLSON University of La Verne KENNETH S. SHULTZ California State University, San Bernardino consistently shown that workers’ attitudes toward work and working evolve over time (Baltes, Rudolph, & Bal, 2013, Chapter 7), and as a result, how they subjectively define career success also changes. To maintain employability, individuals need to be able to respond to constant change. Factors such as globalization and the rapid growth and evolution of technology have impacted the type of skills and abilities that are needed to be effective in today’s organizations (Kotter, 1996; Shultz & Olson, 2013, Chapter 33). The emphasis in most organizations is on acquiring knowledge workers who possess unique skills and who are willing to make ongoing investments to stay current in their areas of expertise (Drucker, 1989; Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright, 2011). With the transition to knowledge work, the importance of using talents and continuing to develop, expand, and refine one’s skills, abilities, and talents are essential components of career and personal success that directly impact employability. Modern career theories such as the kaleidoscope career model (Mainiero & Sullivan, 2005), protean career model (Hall, 2004), boundryless career model (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996), career mobility and embeddedness model (Feldman, 2007), and the lifespan developmental career model (Feldman, 2002) all address how workers at different career stages are likely
In their focal article, Hogan, ChamorroPremuzic, and Kaiser (2013) define career success objectively ‘‘in terms of occupational prestige and financial attainment.’’ However, it is clear from the careers literature that workers in early, mid, and late career are likely to define both subjective and objective career success differently (Wang, Olson, & Shultz, 2013). Therefore, we recommend an expanded definition of career success that includes both subjective and objective measures when exploring the relationship between employability and career success across individuals’ careers. Subjective Career Success Hogan et al. recommend excluding subjective career success as a criterion for employability because they claim that ‘‘some people are ‘predisposed to evaluate their careers favorably.’’’ There is however, abundant literature that clearly defines and measures the distinction between subjective and objective career success (e.g., Ng, Eby, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2005; Ng & Feldman, 2010). In addition, life course research has Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Deborah A. Olson. E-mail:
[email protected] Address: Department of Management and Leadership, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA 91750
17
18
to differentially define what career success means. For example, in describing the kaleidoscope career model, Mainiero and Sullivan (2005) discuss the ABCs of kaleidoscope careers. Specifically, A is for authenticity , B is for balance, and C is for challenge. They note that although all three components are present across career stages, challenge is most prominent at the early career stage, whereas balance is the focus of the midcareer stage. At late career stages, authenticity becomes the driving force in one’s career aspirations. Thus, to define subjective career success uniformly and narrowly for workers at different career stages would be erroneous (Wang et al. 2013). Instead, the subjective nature of career success must be acknowledged, as well as the dynamic nature of how workers across different career stages continually redefine what it means to have subjective career success. Not Just Work: Meaningful Work Engagement and embeddedness in one’s work and career contribute the experience of meaningfulness and satisfaction with work and life (Feldman, 2007). The Gallup Organization gathered data from more than 47,000 employed respondents worldwide (Crabtree, 2011). Their results showed that regardless of country or region that one lived in, employee engagement was linked to personal well-being and one’s overall life evaluation. Looking specifically at the data from respondents in North America, only 27% reported that they were currently engaged in their work; 58% stated they were not engaged, and 15% were actively disengaged. For the 27% who stated that they were engaged, in their overall evaluation of the quality of their life currently, 62% believed that they were thriving and 92% (of those who were engaged) reported that they experienced enjoyment and meaning in their work. Thus, the importance of doing meaningful work as a subjective career success factor cannot be underestimated. Work satisfies a range of needs: economic stability, financial security, skill
D.A. Olson and K.S. Shultz
development, social status, a sense of belonging to a group, recognition for superior work, and the ability to develop one’s talents. Meaningful work, by definition, would engage the energy and focus of the individuals performing the work tasks and activities. Buckingham and Clifton (2001) have discussed in detail the importance of engaging one’s talents at work and the experience that creates for individuals. Individuals who are using their talents at work are naturally energized and engaged when learning information that draws on their talents and facilitates their ability to achieve higher levels of performance (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Peterson & Seligman, 2003). Objective Career Success Hogan et al. focus on traditional objective career success measures by defining it only in terms of occupational prestige and financial attainment. Similarly, much of the work and research that has been conducted on career changes focuses on upward mobility and increases in pay and benefits (Rosen, 1972; Shaw, 1987; Sicherman & Galor, 1990). This line of research is based on the underlying assumption that people change jobs and occupations in order to improve their financial and social status. As noted above, life course research has consistently shown that workers’ attitudes toward work and working evolve over time (Baltes et al., 2013). As a result, late career workers tend to be less interested in promotions to more prestigious positions, and striving for increased financial attainment is often a lower priority as they progress into their late career. Instead, workers become more interested in doing work that is congruent with their values and talents, as well as positions that allow them to continue learning and provide increased flexibility and autonomy. A compelling example of this is the work of Johnson, Kawachi, and Lewis (2009), who analyzed data gathered from over 9,000 individuals between the years of 1992 and 2006 through the Health and Retirement Study. Their results showed that for workers
Employability and career success
over 50 who decided to change jobs, they tended to make less money and were less likely to have pension and health benefits. However, the same individuals reported that their new positions offered more flexible work hours, were less stressful than their previous positions, and that they were more satisfied with these new positions as compared to the roles they held previously. In addition, late career workers who make the decision to change jobs are most likely to take the step to move out of more prestigious managerial jobs and move into sales and operations positions. According to Johnson et al. (2009), the majority of individuals who downshifted reported that even though their new jobs were less prestigious and had a lower social standing, they enjoyed their new jobs more than the previous jobs they held. Thus, using Hogan et al.’s definition of objective career success, these individuals would have very low objective career success. Yet, it is clear that these individuals are doing so willingly in order to increase their subjective career success as they progress in their career. In conclusion, we laud Hogan et al. for discussing the need to bridge the gap between theory and research in the area of employability and career success. However, we believe that their definition of career success as ‘‘occupational prestige and financial attainment’’ fails to recognize the distinctive differences between how early, mid, and late career workers define both subjective and objective career success, as individual’s motivations, desires, and preferences for working evolve as they progress through their career (Wang et al. 2013). Yet, we also accept as true that taking this broader view of career success fits well with Hogan et al.’s rewarding/ability/willingness (RAW) model of the determinants of employability, in that, as they note, this model is inherently compensatory. Thus, in line with newer models of careers (e.g., the kaleidoscope career model), both employability and career success can be compensatory in nature, particularly over time as job demands and conditions change for
19
employers, and personal situations and life circumstances change for individuals. Our call for an expanded view of career success is in line with, and complements, the basic premise of Hogan et al.’s article. In addition, taking a compensatory view of both employability and career success is advantageous in addressing the structural unemployment troubles that U.S. employers increasingly face, where the unemployment and underemployment rates are relatively high, yet employers lament the lack of qualified employees (Hogan et al.). That is, if employers expand their view of what career success means to mid and late career workers (i.e., less about promotions and pay increases, and more about satisfying and fulfilling work), then how they view the employability of mid and late career workers, and thus the pool of employable applicants, expands significantly. References Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Baltes, B. B., Rudolph, C. W., & Bal, A. C. (2013). A review of aging theories and modern work perspectives. In J. W. Hedge, & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of work and aging (pp. 117–136). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D. O. (2001). Now, discover your strengths. New York, NY: The Free Press. Crabtree, S. (2011). A good job means a good life. Retrieved from http://businessjournal.gallup.com/ content/147443/Good-Job-Means-Good-Life. aspx#1. Drucker, P. F. (1989). The new realities: In government and politics, in economics and business; in society and world view . New York, NY: Harper & Row, Publishers. Feldman, D. C. (2002). Stability in the midst of change: A developmental perspective on the study of career. In D. C. Feldman (Ed.), Work careers: A developmental perspective (pp. 3–26). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Feldman, D. C. (2007). Career mobility and career stability among older workers. In K. S. Shultz, & G. A. Adams (Eds.), Aging and work in the 21st century (pp. 179–197). New York, NY: Psychological Press. Hall, D. T. (2004). The protean career: A quarter century journey. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 65, 1–13. Hogan, R., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Kaiser, R. B. (2013). Employability and career success: Bridging
20 the gap between theory and reality. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 6, 3–16. Johnson, R. W., Kawachi, J., & Lewis, E. K. (2009). Older workers on the move: Recareering in later life. Washington, DC: AARP Public Policy Institute. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Mainiero, L. A., & Sullivan, S. E. (2005). Kaleidoscope careers: An alternate explanation for the optout revolution. The Academy of Management Executive , 19, 106–123. Ng, T. W. H., Eby, T. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology , 58, 367–408. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). Human capital and objective indicators of career success: The mediating effects of cognitive ability and conscientiousness. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 83, 207–235. Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2011). Fundamental of human resource management . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
P.D. Harms and B.J. Brummel Peterson, C. M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). Positive organizational studies: Lessons from positive psychology. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 14–28). San Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler. Rosen, S. (1972). Learning and experience in the labor market. Journal of Human Resources, 7 (3), 326–342. Shaw, K. L. (1987). Occupational change, employer change, and the transferability of skills. Southern Economic Journal , 53, 702–719. Shultz, K. S., & Olson, D. A. (2013). The changing nature of work and retirement. In M. Wang (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of retirement (pp. 543–558). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Sicherman, N., & Galor, O. (1990). A theory of career mobility. Journal of Political Economy , 98(1), 169–192. Wang, M., Olson, D. A., & Shultz, K. S. (2013). Mid and late career issues: An integrative perspective. New York, NY: Routledge Academic Press.
