PREDICTORS OF CAREER SUCCESS & GENDER: A PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PAPER By Rachel Samuel Supervisors: Intan Osman & Mahfooz A Ansari Universiti Sains Malaysia.

PREDICTORS OF CAREER SUCCESS & GENDER:

A PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PAPER

ByRachel Samuel

Supervisors: Intan Osman & Mahfooz A AnsariUniversiti Sains Malaysia

Wk 6.1

BACKGROUND

Women make up an increasing proportion of full time workforce and of managers around the world (Wirth, 2001); yet they are under-represented in management in most countries and in senior management everywhere (Davidson & Burke, 2004).

Top management and senior management positions related to being successful in career.

Does this mean that women have not been as successful as men in terms of career?

Distribution of Female Employment by Occupation, 2004 in Malaysia (%)

Legislators, senior officials & managers 5.9; Professionals 6.7;Technicians & associate professionals13.0;Clerical workers17.5;Service workers, shop and market sales workers18.4;Skilled agricultural & fishery workers10.0;Craft and related trade workers5.2;Plant & machine operators and assemblers11.4; Elementary Workers12.0

DEFINITION

Career success can be divided into 2:

Extrinsic (Objective) Intrinsic (Subjective)Salary * SatisfactionPromotion * Life success

(Gattiker & Larwood, 1988; (Judge et al, 1995) Boudreau et al, 2001)

career success in two distinctive ways: first, the external, extrinsic or objective perspective. Here, visible metrics or tangible indicators are used, for example, salary, promotions or status. These measures have been considered as the hallmarks of career success across a wide range of societies (Nicholson, 2000). In addition, proximity to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and employability are also included as extrinsic aspects. CEO proximity reflects power, authority and responsibility in the current organization. Employability is an increasing indicator of success as multiple-employer and multiple-profession careers become more common (Boudreau et al., 2001).

The second measure is subjective, intrinsic or internal and this would depend on what individuals perceive the criteria of success to be using personal definitions of success or failure, across any dimensions that are important to that individual (Van Maanen, 1977; Gattiker & Larwood, 1989; Miguel, 1993). Intrinsic success is made up of job success, interpersonal success and hierarchical success. Job success means the extent to which individuals perceive that their jobs offer opportunities for achievement, satisfaction, learning and development. Interpersonal success is the degree to which individuals perceive they are respected and accepted by their work colleagues. Hierarchical success is the extent to which individuals are satisfied with their up-to-date hierarchical advancement and their prospects for future advancement.

Subjective career success is also measured by career satisfaction (Burke, 2001; Ng et al, 2005) and life satisfaction. Adding life satisfaction to the measures of career success acknowledges the importance of work-life and family balance (Boudreau et al., 2001). A dual operationalization of career success is necessary because the two do not always overlap (Poole, Langan-Fox & Omodei, 1993; Bozionelos, 2003).

The analysis of researches on career success since 1980 show that the objective criteria/ measure have dominated most research (Burke & Vinnicombe, 2005;Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Ng et al, 2005; Eddleston et al, 2004; Ismail, Mohd Rasdi & Abdul Wahat, 2005; Kottke & Agars, 2005). The subjective criteria, though not commonly used, has been increasingly adopted over the last decade (Nabi, 2001; Greenhaus, 2003; Hall, 2002; Ng et al., 2005).

The deficiency of using objective success criteria has been recognized for a long time (Hilton & Dill, 1962). However, many studies continue to use this measure as the sole criteria of career success (Chenevert & Tremblay, 2002; Judiesh & Lyness, 1999; Lyness & Thompson, 2000). Likewise, subjective measures of career success also have its limitation. Subjective measures should include reactions to actual and anticipated career-related attainments across a broader time frame than one’s immediate job satisfaction (Greenhaus, Callanan & Godshalk, 2000) as well as wider range of outcomes, such as a sense of identity (Law, Meijers & Weijers, 2002), purpose (Cochran, 1990) and work-life balance (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000). Job satisfaction may contribute to subjective career success but it could be distinct and not necessarily related. Hence, future research should avoid adopting job satisfaction alone as proxy for subjective career success (Heslin, 2005).

AN ERA OF CHANGE?For career success to be measured using objective

measures, one has to advance hierarchically within a single organization over the course of their career (Eby et al., 2003). However, linear, secure and predictable careers have been replaced by dynamic, flexible and multidirectional career paths (Baruch, 2006). Since late 1990s, career no longer follow a linear path but are boundaryless, protean and portable in nature (Sullivan, 1999; Goffee & Jones, 2000). In a linear career path, managerial success is normally looked at using tangible outcomes and the milestones are compensation, promotions offered and managerial level. In a boundaryless career, however, success is marked by career impatience (the need to move to something better), marketability, willingness to relocate, mentoring efficacy and exposure to powerful networks (Arthur, Inkson & Pringle, 1999; Eby et al., 2003).

The individual factors of success which are discussed within the boundaryless career literature are career competencies (knowing why, knowing how and knowing whom), locus of career development responsibility and the boundary between work and personal life (which is considered as part of intrinsic success) (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Cappellen & Janssens, 2005). As organizations begin to downsize and delayer, hierarchical success is difficult to achieve. If career is boundaryless, then success is related to accomplishments, expertise and personal achievement (Wellington, Kropf & Gerkovich, 2003).

Linked to boundaryless career is the concept of protean career which is internally-oriented, flexible, and mobile and may involve both horizontal and vertical growth in the pursuit of goals defined by individual workers (Hall, 1999; Sullivan, 1995). Protean model assumes that careers continue to develop throughout life as skills and knowledge is continuously sought in accordance with individual goals (MacDermid & Lee, 2001). This model allows workers with various personal or family needs or different definitions of success to adjust the pace of their career development while continuing to make valuable contributions to the organization. The increasing diversity of the workforce will continue to increase the pressure on organizations to create niches whereby all workers, not just those following the traditional external career, can be successful (MacDermid & Lee, 2001).

Role of GenderResearch on career success and gender has

long been examined (Powell & Mainiero, 1992; Lyness & Thompson, 2000). When objective criteria is used to measure career success, women fall short. Though with equal employment policies women are given more opportunities to advance, a wide wage gap remains between men and women.

Women however report equal levels of subjective success to men (Kirchmeyer, 1998; Bradley, Brown & Dower, 2003). Understanding of women’s careers require the acknowledgement that women have fundamentally different experiences and women find themselves in different situations when developing their career compared to men (Mavin, 2001). Pay and position do not appear to define how women managers and older managers define success for themselves (Sturges, 1999). Women were more likely than men to describe success with reference to internal intangible criteria especially accomplishment, achievement, and in particular personal recognition. Women have transcended material career success and their definition of success is broader. Career success is just one part of the success they wish to achieve in other parts of their lives as a whole. That is why balance is important for women.

For men, it is essentially career success when they talk about success (Wellington et al, 2003). Despite poorer income progression and lower returns from promotion, women may perceive careers to be as successful as males. In fact, once the effects of the career determinants were considered simultaneously, women’s perception of success is higher than men (Jackson, 1989).

How do women fit into these changes in the career and working world? Women now prefer a kaleidoscope model of career that fits their concerns for authenticity, balance and challenge, vis-à-vis the demands of their career in the new millennium (Mainiero & Sullivan, 2005). They prefer self-crafted careers that suit their objectives, needs and life-criteria, where they can blend and integrate rather than separate the work and non-work facets of their lives. Today’s managerial and professional women do not have a typical male-type linear career. She is prepared to settle for a satisfying career than one that maximises her capacity to reach the top (Mainiero & Sullivan, 2005). Hence, research should focus on finding the most valid predictors of job performance or success regardless of the job (Canger, 2003).

Women’s career might not follow the same trend as men’s where in the middle and later career years, men experience stability, maintenance and decline. Women, on the other hand, might find renewed sense of purpose, energy and increased vitality for work pursuits in middle adulthood (O’Neil & Bilimoria, 2005). Between the ages of 24 and 35 years, women experience positive management. The trend in career is positive in this stage. In the second stage, between the ages of 36 and 45 years, women are between middle and upper levels of management in many organizations. If their needs are not met at this stage, they can quit and this will result in continued under-representation of women in senior organizational levels. For women in management positions, the burdens placed upon them during this stage are enormous, and it often happens at a time in their lives when they are trying to juggle the requirements of young families, ageing parents and developing their own careers (Cross & Linehan, 2006). The career trend is negative in this stage. The third stage, between ages 46 and 60, the career trend is positive again. Success for these women is about recognition, respect and living integrated lives (Wellington et al, 2003).

The relationship between mentoring, networking and career success has been noted in literature on career success (O’Reilly, 2001; Higgins and Kram, 2001). Would these variables still be critical when determining success in the boundaryless career? In the pursuit of boundaryless career success within the organizational setting, individuals still need the factors of information, support and relationship ties. In fact, extra-organizational support which is one of the outcomes of boundaryless career is drawn from the individual’s peer group within the same occupational or industrial setting (Arthur & Parker, 2002). Hence, these variables are also related to boundaryless career success measures.

In the boundaryless career, too, some personality factors are pertinent to strive for goals in the individual’s lives. Self-confidence (self-efficacy) which is important for advancing careers in organizations could be an equally important factor for success in the boundaryless career (Hollenbeck & Hall, 2004; Hall, 2002). To chart your own direction and to pursue goals which are important to an individual, self-confidence is a very effective tool.

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

i) Contest-mobility perspectiveii) Sponsored-mobility perspective (Turner,

1960)

PREDICTORS THAT HAVE BEEN FREQUENTLY USED: Human capital (Wayne, 1999; Kirchmeyer,

2002) Organizational sponsorship (Dreher & Ash,

1990) Socio-demographic predictors (gender, race,

marital status & age) (Powell & Butterfield, 2003; Simpson et al, 2004)

Stable individual differences (Seibert et al, 2001; Eby et al, 2003)

ISSUES TO BE LOOKED AT

Salary, promotion & career satisfaction represent conceptually distinct aspects of career success (Judge et al, 1995; Poole et al, 1993; Jaskolka et al, 1985)—need to isolate key variables that predict a particular aspect of career success.

In sponsored-mobility perspective, need to look at person-organization fit.

Continued…

Boundaryless career—to examine the presence of strong external networks (Eby et al, 2003; Arthur & Rousseau, 1996)

Specific conditions where men and women may have advantage over one another (Ragins et al, 1998; Ng et al, 2005)