Table of Contents

Introduction 1

Success Criterion Deficiency 1

Multi-Dimensional Measurement 2

Subjective Success Criteria Types 2

Other-Referent and Self-Referent Criteria

Career Success Factors 3

Career Type and Contextual & Individual Factors
Four Categories Predictors
Person Organizational Fit
Cultural Differences
Family Support, Referent Choice, Career Stage, Life Events

Method 5
Participants
Data Collection and Analysis
Types of Subjective Success Criteria

Discussion of Findings 7
Implications
Limitations

Conclusion 8

References 9

Appendix A 10
Introduction

Career success has been defined as collective outcome as a result of one’s work experiences over time

(Seibert, Crant & Kraimer, 1999). Career success is an interest not only to individuals, but to

organizations too as individual personal success may ultimately contribute to the organizational success.

How individual conceptualize their career success can be understand from individual level (e.g., socio-

demographic status, personality traits, etc.) and organizational level (e.g., corporate culture, person-

organizational-fit, industry sectors, etc.) and they are interdependence. It is not just financial rewards,

occupational prestige and job satisfaction that individual are looking for, and life satisfaction does plays

along. Modern Career is progressively becoming boundary less, hence a wider range of criteria has to

be considered in different career context and in-depth interview may disclose further on the neglected

aspect of career success.

Success Criterion Deficiency

Many studies have identified that success criterion has been operationalized in a deficient manner and

success criterion can be affected by a number of factors, not just objective criteria alone. Objective

career success is characterized by objective achievements (E.g.: pay, promotions and occupational

prestige) which have been acknowledged as the signs of career success (Nicholson, 2000).

Organizational changes such as the effect of globalization on organizations has accountable to have

moderated the importance of a few conventional objective indicators of career success like prospect for

promotion and desirability of the job have been reduced (Reitman & Schneer, 2003). It is perplexing

that pay and promotions keep on being connected as a basis of career success despite the fact that “the

shortcomings of salary as a measure of man’s progress are well known” (Hilton & Dill, 1962).

Contaminated (i.e., above one’s control such as labor market conditions) and deficient are the two key

limitations on performance evaluation of pay and promotion (Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, & Weick,

1970). Objective achievements are not all that individual look for from their career, but can be

subjective outcomes like work-life balance (Finegold & Mohrman, 2001), a sense of meaning, purpose

and input from their job (Hall, 2002). Subjective career success is characterized by one’s values,

1
feelings, perceptions and preferences about their career. Job satisfaction cannot be used as a one and

only substitute for it.

Multi-Dimensional Measurement

Measure subjective success criteria along with objective achievements can be dealt with the deficiency

of objective success criteria. And to improve the subjective career success measurement, social

comparison cannot be neglected because an appropriate examination of career success goes to the heart

of how the societies function (Frank & Cook, 1995). Knowing what employees want (e.g., work-life

balance, appreciation), knowing who is (e.g., different industry sectors’ individual may conceptualize

different career success meaning: teachers, business owner, actors), and knowing how to adopt more

qualitative methods (e.g., in-depth interviews regarding the meaning of career success), these three

elements are established by Parker and Arthur (2002) as a measurement for subjective career success.

Both other-referent and self-referent criteria should be taken into consideration while assessing

subjective career success in order to enhance the precision of the results obtained.

Subjective Success Criteria Types

Other-Referent and Self-Referent Criteria

There is considerable hypothetical and observational source to trust that other-referent and self-referent

criteria are relative to each other and are drawn from objective and subjective domains when individuals

access their career outcomes (Heslin, 2005). Other-referent success criteria refer to comparing the

achievements and expectations of others. Whereas self-referent success criteria reflect personal

aspirations and self-satisfaction which act according to individual standard much more greatly than

material rewards (Hall, 2002). Self-referent criteria may likewise relate to objective criteria (e.g.: one’s

career objective is to be a Vice President by the age of 36).

2
Career Success Factors

Career Type and Contextual & Individual Factors

Both contextual factors (e.g.: winner-take-all markets and organizational culture), likewise individual

factors (e.g.: work orientation and goal orientation) are appeared to be the possibly impact of criteria

that are most significant to individuals when they assess their career success (Gunz and Heslin, 2005).

Implicit Person Theory (IPT) which is about one’s ability and personality plays a major role in affecting

one’s goal orientation. For example, performance goal pursuer is typically an entity theorist which

generally has a low self-referent criteria in consideration for career success (Heslin, 2003). Career type

(i.e., linear and non-linear) is an interaction variable between contextual and individual requirement

which may influence the different types of subjective success criteria. For example, organization

downsizing and outsourcings will have an impact on linear career success like employees’ corporate

ladder advancement is diminished, and employee might even transform into a non-linear career if they

experienced adversity or tragedy happened to them.

Four Categories Predictors

Based on Ng et al. (2005) meta-analysis study, there are four predictors sets of career success have been

categorized as: human capital (e.g. education, experiences), organizational sponsorship (e.g. support,

learning and development opportunity), socio-demographic status (e.g. gender, marital status, age) and

individual differences (e.g. ability, personality traits). Their findings has proposed that organizational

sponsorship and individual differences are more relevant to subjective career success, as they influence

individual’s psychological well-being. Individual’s cognitive ability, openness to experience,

proactivity, conscientiousness, extroversion and locus of control are positively correlated with career

success. Whereas, human capital and socio-demographic status are more relevant to objective career

success. Arnania-Kepuladze (2010) revealed that women tend to take interpersonal relations, family,

surroundings, and lifestyle into consideration for their career success assessment. On the other hand,

desire for power, status, personal achievement, self-assertion and independence-oriented are the traits

that can be found in men. Therefore, men and women are tend to construct a different meaning of career

success.

3
Person Organizational Fit

Bretz and Judge (1994) study has shown that Person Organizational Fit (POF) was a substantial

predictor of both objective and subjective achievements. POF should influence not only on satisfaction

and tenure with the organization, but also measure of pay and job level attained in career success.

Individual who fit into the organizational environment would display higher job involvement, greater

commitment and higher job satisfaction level which result low turnover, more practical adaptive manner

and eventually contribute to the organizational success. This “fit” will lead to organization’s

sponsorship decisions and provide indications to employees that they are appreciated. Having an

appealing corporate culture, career development opportunity, supervisor support, strong value system,

positive social network and high autonomy organization might attract and retain the employees which

in turn influence their "fit" level, their perception and meaning of career success.

Cultural Differences

With the growth of globalization, today’s social space of career has gone worldwide, and therefore

culture does play a part to stimulus and shape one’s career objective. Briscoe, Hall, & Mayrhofer (2011)

has defined culture “consists of language, ideas, beliefs, customs, taboos, codes, institutions, tools,

techniques, work of art, rituals and symbol”. Individuals from different beliefs, languages, institutions,

etc. will have diverse life experiences. The cultural diversity can be explained based on Hofstede’s

(2001) five cultural dimensions (i.e., power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance,

and long-term orientation). Organizational values and individual’s career preferences are shape by these

cultural dimensions. For example, a leader who perceived high power distance, may not give

empowerment to the employees, therefore low level of autonomy may result in low job satisfaction.

Employee who is an individualist might lose connections with other colleagues, as they focus on

personal goals, social recognition and career advancement. On the other hand, collectivist employee

demonstrate higher commitment, with group responsibility and may expect support from others in the

organization. There is a need for the organization to identify and understand the cultural differences in

order to prepare a set of practices to facilitate the career development among employees.

4
Family Support, Referent Choice, Career Stage, Life Events

Family relationship may provide the basis for subjective career success and it can either be leading the

individual to be motivated and self-efficacy of their work or demoralize them. Who they use as a

referent choice especially on subjective aspect also need to be examined. When individuals at different

career stage, their career success meaning tends to evolve too. Life events such as marriage, illness,

bankruptcy, etc. can cause an individual either become more resilience or less resilience, whether

individual can face down reality, search for meaning and continually improvise. All these factors are

playing a role on how individuals conceptualize their career success.

Method

Participants

This semi-structured interview, conducted in University of Kent was part of the primary qualitative

evidence gathered on how students in the university conceptualize their career success. Five students

consist of three males and two females from different countries have been selected.

Data Collection and Analysis

The objective was to discover and understand the career success meaning from the participants with

different backgrounds. The Interview session was tape-recorded after obtaining consent from the

participants. Demographic characteristics of participants were gathered and as shown in Table 1.

5
Table 1
Participant Age Gender Marital Nationality Current Previous Job
Code Status Education Designation
P1 24 Male Single Portuguese MSc in Corporate
International Finance
Banking Trainee (9
Finance months
working
experience)
P2 27 Female Single Thai MSc in Assistance
Finance and Finance
Management Analyst (3
years working
experience)
P3 24 Male Single Ecuadorian MSc in N/A
Finance and
Management
P4 25 Male Single Pakistani MSc in Risk Analyst (3
Applied years working
Actuarial experience)
Science
P5 30 Female Single Singaporean MSc in Payroll
Finance and Executive (7
Management years working
experience)

Types of Subjective Success Criteria

Participants were asked to response to the following questions as it will add to the understanding of

how they view career success:

- Share some background (i.e.: family, work).

- What does career success mean to you?

- What would it take for you to consider yourself as being successful?

The analysis of participants’ responses are grouped into self-referent and other-referent criteria that

drawn from both objective and subjective domains as shown in Table 2.

6
Table 2
(Please refer to Appendix A for participants’ career success definitions)
Objective Domain Subjective Domain

Self-Referent a) Objective/Self-Referent b) Subjective/Self-Referent

Emphasis on pay rather than title My goals are work life balance, learning
Domain (P5) path is important, must be satisfied with
my job (P1)

Like to challenge myself, don’t mind to

invest on courses to develop myself
further – learning goals (P2, P5)

Work-life balance still important (P4)

A sense of achievements, help the needy,

make a difference (P5)

Other-Referent c) Objective/Other-Referent d) Subjective/Other-Referent

Domain Pay is important, look for

progression (P1)

Would like to see myself in

progress (P2)

Pay, title and upward

advancement are important (P3)

I see work as a way to get the

money I need to live my life (P4)

Discussion of Findings

Pay, work life balance and learning path are the three most mentioned career success related elements

among participants. Other factors such as education is also a factor that influencing their career success.

Partly due to their home countries’ company entry requirements which is emphasizing more on the

qualifications. Personal history like family educational background also seemed as an internal

influencing. The national cultural differences doesn’t seem to be influencing one another in a basic need

to succeed. P3 is an entity theorist which adopted only other-referent criteria for his career success

assessment and only one participant mentioned about the sense of achievements and making a

difference, this could be due to the age factor and experiences.

7
Implications

Objective/other-referent and subjective/self-referent domains are found in this study to explain

significant in overall career success. Those in early career stage seems to value objective achievements,

organizational learning and development more rather than about making a difference. Employer should

not consider one-size-fits-all approach but accommodate accordingly to early and mid/late career stage

employees, have to think about the POF factor as it eventually beneficial to the organization.

Limitations

This qualitative study was based on a small sample, all are students, not much working experience, and

thus it is rather hard to evaluate a substantial results with other possible career success variables.

Conclusion

Apart from the limitations, this findings has highlight the importance of human capital, organizational

sponsorship, socio-demographic and individual differences variables in understanding career success.

Other factors also need to be examine in order to be more completely understand the complicated

phenomenon of career success. And it can be conclude that most individuals do assess their career

success relative to both self-referent and other-referent criteria.

8
References

Arnania-Kepuladze, T. (2010) ‘Gender stereotypes and gender feature of job motivation: differences or
similarity?’ Problems and Perspectives in Management, Vol 8, issue 2.

Bretz, J., Robert D. and Judge, T.A. (1994) ‘Person–Organization fit and the theory of work adjustment:
Implications for satisfaction, tenure, and career success’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44(1), pp.
32–54.

Briscoe, J.P., Hall, D.T. and Mayrhofer, W. (2011) Careers around the world: Individual and contextual
perspectives. New York: Routledge.

Campbell, J. P., Dunnette, M. D., Lawler, E. E., & Weick, K. E. (1970). Managerial behavior,
performance and effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Finegold, D., & Mohrman, S. A. (2001). What do employees really want? The perception vs. the reality.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland.

Frank, R. H., & Cook, P. J. (1995). The winner-take-all society: How more and more Americans
compete for fewer and bigger prizes, encouraging economic waste, income inequality, and an
impoverished cultural life. New York: Free Press.

Gunz, H.P. and Heslin, P.A. (2005) ‘Reconceptualizing career success’, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26, 105–111.

Hall, D. T. (2002). Careers in and out of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Heslin, P.A. (2003) ‘Self- and other-referent criteria of career success’, Journal of Career Assessment,
11(3), pp. 262–286.

Heslin, P.A. (2005) ‘Conceptualizing and evaluating career success’, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26(2), pp. 113–136.

Hilton, T. L., & Dill,W. R. (1962). Salary growth as a criterion of career progress. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 46, 153–158.

Hofstede, G. (2001) ‘Culture’s recent consequences: Using dimension scores in theory and
research’, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 1(1), pp. 11–17.

Ng, T.W.H., Eby, L.T., Sorensen, K.L. and Feldman, D.C. (2005) ‘Predictors of objective and
subjective career success: A meta-analysis’, Personnel Psychology, 58(2), pp. 367–408.

Nicholson, N. (2000). Motivation–selection–connection: an evolutionary model of career development.

In M. Peiperl, M. Arthur, R. Goffee, & T. Morris (Eds.), Career frontiers: New concepts of working life
(pp. 54–75). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Parker, P. and Arthur, M.B. (2002) ‘Bringing "New Science” Into careers research. Management, 5,
105-125.
http://www.cairn.info/revue-management-2002-1-page-105.htm

Reitman, F., & Schneer, J. A. (2003). The promised path: a longitudinal study of managerial careers.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 60–75.

Seibert, S.E., Crant, J.M. and Kraimer, M.L. (1999) ‘Proactive personality and career success’, Journal
of Applied Psychology, 84(3), pp. 416–427.

9
Appendix A

P1
Pay is important, but do not preferred a stagnant/routine job. My goal is to learn as much as I can and
then progress. And preferred work-life balance, so that have time for gym, hang out with friends. Not
work till midnight like others (my friends) although can earn more. Might compare the pay with peers
(colleagues, same position level). Education and ongoing learning are important to shape my career
success. It can make me go further although it is not always the case. It is part of the success, but it is
not a main thing, the important one is must be happy with the job. But my career success might change
after I have gained certain working experience. My grandma was a judge, mother is a teacher, father is
an engineer, and siblings obtained master degree qualifications too.

P2
Future is important for me. My bachelor degree was major in English, and now I am doing Finance
Management because I want to move myself into a career in finance. Would like to take up more
challenging job, learn new things, pay is not the main factors for me as long as it meet my minimum
requirement. Would like to see the progression, where I can be in the next level. I don’t mind to spend
money to learn new things, acquire new knowledge, and spend more time on the things I think it is
worth it. I don’t compare it with my friends who is achieving more, but will use it as a motivation, to
push myself to do more. Most of my friends and even my sister has obtained the master degree
qualifications. Thailand culture also valued people that who have higher qualification, and the
university that we are graduated from. And mostly people in Thailand will have master degree provided
they have time and fund to do so.

P3
I am looking for higher pay, title and upward advancement in the company. I don’t mind to work extra
hours in the first few years to get what I want. Suffer now, enjoy later. Learning curve is also important,
and it really depends on the company I am getting in. And I am looking at starting up my business in
financial sector too, now just need to finish the study, get the working experience and see what I can
take away from the experience.

P4
Looking at the whole remuneration package (pay, learning and development) that the company can
offer. I will not preferred to work extra hours for long term, I want life. I see work as a way to get the
money I need to live my life, I love travelling. I am fairly flexible, depends on the option I end up
getting. Not necessary must be in the top 5 company. If working for an amazing company, I am willing
to let go something like my personal life for some time, but definitely not for long term. I do believed
that productivity will drop if getting too much long hours of work. Most people have master degree
qualification in my home country. Corporations do look at your qualifications, although bachelor degree
still can allow you to get a job, but master degree in any field is more valued by the corporation.

P5
I will look for higher pay. Title is not really matter for me as long as I can earn more and get a sense of
achievement from my job. I want to have my own spare time to do the things I like. Can be yoga, gym,
and attend some classes to gain some knowledge or skills. And this knowledge doesn’t need to be related
to my job, I would preferred it to be my personal development kind of thing. I’d love to see myself to
be involve more in voluntary activity, I would like to help the needy, make a difference to the less
fortunate society. And if I have the chance, I would like to run my own business, and money is what I
am aiming for, after that, I can do what I want and love to do (travelling, volunteering, practice martial
art, etc.)

10
Available from: https://geert-hofstede.com/portugal.html [Accessed 09 November 2016]

11