Pursuing Money and Power,Prosocial Contributions,or Personal Growth: Measurement and Nomological Net of Different Career Strivings

Abstract

There is considerable agreement that individuals need an “inner compass” to manage their careers as self-directed and values-driven. However, how different career strivings (i.e., long-term, values-related career goals) affect career development remains largely unaddressed. To tackle this issue, we conducted a study to develop and validate new scales to assess self-enhancement, self-transcendence, and personal growth career strivings, representing key self-focused and other-focused extrinsic and intrinsic career goals. The validation of the scales among 389 U.S. and 490 German workers confirmed that career strivings are differentially related to existing measures of intrinsic and extrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings. Moreover, we confirmed with a time-lagged study among 354 German workers that career strivings (especially personal growth strivings) relate positively to career commitment, career satisfaction, and life meaningfulness. The studies support the utility of examining different career strivings as critical motivational factors in self-directed career management in future research.

Keywords

career strivings career motivation career goals career self-management

Due to an increased dynamic in labor markets, demographic changes, digitization, and globalization, there is a large agreement in the careers’ literature that individuals need to be increasingly self-directed and take control of their careers (Hall et al., 2018; Hirschi & Koen, 2021; Savickas, 2013). Individuals thus need to exercise adaptive agency to anticipate and adjust to career changes and challenges (Savickas, 2013). Exhibiting this type of agency requires engagement in goal setting and goal pursuit (Bandura, 2006), which allows for protean careers that are self-directed and values-driven (Hall, 1996; Hall et al., 2018). Because careers unfold over the entire lifespan and comprise many unexpected challenges and changes, especially relatively long-term, values-related goals are essential to give a career direction and meaning (Hall et al., 2018; Savickas, 2013). Such goals can be described as strivings, representing more abstract, enduring agendas of what individuals are trying to accomplish and the purpose of their actions (Emmons, 1986). In the career context, and with reference to Emmons (1986, p. 1059), we define career strivings as “long-term, enduring, values-related goals which represent what individuals are characteristically aiming at accomplishing in their careers and the purpose or purposes that a person is trying to carry out in their career.”

Existing research acknowledged that career strivings guide careers, that individuals differ meaningfully in their strivings (Hall et al., 2018), and that this has important implications for their general well-being and careers (Dittmar et al., 2014; Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Kasser & Ryan, 1996). Probably most prominently, research examined strivings in terms of extrinsic and intrinsic (career) goals (Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Seibert et al., 2013). Extrinsic goals aim at extrinsically motivating attributes such as visible success, status, influence within the organization or society, and high financial rewards. Conversely, intrinsic goals focus on intrinsically motivating attributes, such as continually gaining new skills and knowledge, having interesting and challenging work, or having the opportunity to do work that impacts society. Research found that people with extrinsic goals showed lower vitality and self-actualization and more physical symptoms. Conversely, individuals with intrinsic aspirations reported higher well-being and less distress (Kasser & Ryan, 1996). For career goals more specifically, university alums with extrinsic career goals were less likely to apply for a graduate program. In contrast, those with intrinsic career goals had higher intentions to pursue graduate education (Seibert et al., 2013). Focusing on intrinsic goals is also a critical component of a protean career. This is in contrast to a traditional career focused more on extrinsic goals (Hall et al., 2018).

Despite the acknowledged importance of different types of (career) goals/strivings in career development, research has paid little attention to this issue. For example, research on the protean career (Hall et al., 2018) focused heavily on how people manage their careers regarding their self-directed and values-driven orientation or career behaviors. Conversely, why and for which purpose(s) individuals self-manage their careers has received sparse attention (Hirschi & Koen, 2021). However, given the presumed importance of being values-directed in career self-management (Hall et al., 2018), it would be critical to know to what extent career strivings are related to important work (e.g., career commitment) and life outcomes (e.g., life meaningfulness). Addressing this issue, Dik et al. (2008) presented an approach to assess career development strivings in terms of individual differences in the types of motives (e.g., self-efficacy and outcome expectation) that underly self-generated, idiosyncratic goals. However, more research is needed to understand better the type of goals/strivings individuals pursue to understand what gives direction and meaning to protean careers (Hall & Mirvis, 1996).

To better understand the implications of different career strivings for career and life outcomes, research needs a clear conceptualization and measurement of pivotal career strivings that individuals pursue. For this, it also seems helpful to go beyond the simpler distinction of extrinsic vs. intrinsic goals and consider that intrinsic goals can be more self-focused (i.e., personal development) or other-focused (i.e., social contributions) (Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Seibert et al., 2013), which could be related to meaningfully different theoretical predictors and outcomes. In sum, a focus on career strivings is essential because it goes beyond the currently dominant focus in career research on how individuals manage their careers and focuses more on why people pursue their careers and what purpose(s) they aim to attain in their careers.

To address these issues, we herein focus on three pivotal career strivings: self-enhancement career strivings, which focus on extrinsic goals in terms of power, prestige, and high income; self-transcendence career strivings, which encompass other-focused intrinsic goals in terms of helping others and contributing to society and the common good; and personal growth career strivings, which entail self-focused intrinsic goals to grow personally, develop knowledge and skills, and do interesting work. We develop and validate new items to assess these career strivings following best-practice recommendations (Hinkin, 1998) with three samples (two from the US and one from Germany) in three steps of (1) item generation and item selection; (2) confirming factor structure in a new sample; and (3) establishing differential construct validity in relation to other constructs (i.e., extrinsic/intrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings) and work and life outcomes (i.e., career commitment, career satisfaction, and life meaningfulness).

The paper contributes to the career management and life values/goals literature in three ways: We (1) provide a set of validated items to assess different career strivings for use in future research; (2) contribute to a better understanding of the nomological net of different career strivings in terms of their relation to other important career constructs; and (3) contribute knowledge to how different strivings are related to different work and life outcomes. We also outline a series of future research directions focusing on career strivings.

The Nature and Importance of Career Strivings

According to Emmons (1986), strivings represent a unifying construct that can join different goals and actions under a common theme. Strivings do not refer to one specific goal but to a more abstract, long-term quality that can be achieved in various ways. Strivings play a vital role in the theory of purposeful work behavior (Barrick et al., 2013), where motivational strivings are “essential, enduring personal agendas” (p.8) that represent goals that are not specified in fully detailed plans and actions but are still concrete enough to guide future-directed actions. Strivings should play a key role in career management because goals direct career self-management behaviors (Lent & Brown, 2013), and especially value-related goals can give direction (i.e., act as an “inner compass”) and meaning in self-directed careers (Hall & Mirvis, 1996). In sum, personal career strivings are critical to understanding self-directed career management because they can affect the specific goals that people set for their careers, how and what type of information they seek to attain their goals, how they are planning and executing career behaviors, and how they process and evaluated feedback from engaging in career actions (Hirschi & Koen, 2021).

Three Types of Career Striving

A prominent distinction between different general, value-related goals is between extrinsic and intrinsic goals (Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Seibert et al., 2013). This distinction is also prominent in the careers’ literature on a conceptual (Hall et al., 2018) and empirical level (Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Seibert et al., 2013), where it is proposed that individuals differ meaningfully in the extent to which they pursue extrinsic or intrinsic goals in their careers and that this has meaningful effects on their career management and career outcomes. Research showed, for example, that individuals who pursue intrinsic goals typically report increased well-being, life meaningfulness, positive interpersonal relationships, and increased job performance (Crocker et al., 2017; Moynihan et al., 2015; Sheldon et al., 2004; Zhang et al., 2018). Conversely, individuals who place relatively high importance on obtaining extrinsic goals such as wealth and status often report lower quality social relationships, reduced job and career satisfaction, lower work engagement, and decreased well-being (Deckop et al., 2010; Dittmar et al., 2014; Kasser, 2016; Unanue et al., 2017).

In the current paper, we go beyond this more straightforward distinction and propose that intrinsic goals should be differentiated into other- and self-focused goals. The first type of intrinsic strivings represents self-transcendent strivings that focus on benevolence, prosocial contributions, and universalism. The second type of intrinsic goals focuses on personal growth and development. This differentiation within intrinsic goals is consistent with research on work values which typically distinguishes intrinsic/cognitive work values from social/altruistic work values (Jin & Rounds, 2012; Lyons et al., 2010; Ros et al., 1999). More generally, the distinction is also made in research on personal goals, which found that self-transcendence is an independent dimension from extrinsic vs. intrinsic personal goals (Grouzet et al., 2005). Finally, distinguishing other-focused from self-focused intrinsic goals is consistent with recent conceptualizations of motivational strivings, which differentiate strivings related to affiliation and communion with others from strivings for personal growth (Barrick et al., 2002; Kooij et al., 2011). In sum, in the current paper, we will distinguish between self-enhancement career strivings, defined as a striving to attain power, recognition, and financial success in one’s career; self-transcendent career strivings, defined as a striving to help others and contribute to society and the greater good in one’s career; and personal growth career strivings, defined as a striving to grow and develop in one’s career personally.

Career Strivings and Closely Related Constructs

As previously mentioned, extrinsic and intrinsic career goals are closely related to career strivings. Research established the relevance of extrinsic and intrinsic career goals, for example, by showing that they affect how employees perform in high-performance work systems (Wang & Chen, 2022) or experience career success (Abele & Spurk, 2009). Per our previously provided definition and framework, career strivings are long-term, enduring, values-related goals that encompass both extrinsic (i.e., self-enhancement) and intrinsic career goals (i.e., self-transcendence and personal growth). However, the proposed career strivings framework differs from existing concepts and measures of extrinsic/intrinsic career goals (Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Seibert et al., 2013) by differentiating between self-transcendent and personal growth career strivings as other-focused vs. self-focused intrinsic career goals.

Another closely related construct to career strivings is work values. While there are many different categorizations of work values (see Jin & Rounds, 2012, for an overview), all typically include self-transcendent (i.e., altruism and social relationships), self-enhancement (i.e., pay and prestige), conservation (i.e., security and authority), and openness to change values (i.e., variety and autonomy) (Cable & Edwards, 2004; Jin & Rounds, 2012). Research showed the relevance of work values, for example, by examining how work values related to job and career choices (Duffy & Sedlacek, 2007; Judge & Bretz, 1992), job satisfaction (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005), and career success (Erdogan et al., 2004). Because career strivings are value-related goals, they overlap with the concept of work values. However, work values are typically examined from a person-environment fit perspective as preferences (or needs) for work environments and work outcomes in relation to affordances in the workplace. They are thus typically more focused on the current job and job preferences, particularity concerning person-environment (i.e., job and organization) fit (Cable & Edwards, 2004; Dawis & Lofquist, 1984). In contrast, career strivings focus on more abstract, long-term career goals.

Also closely related is the concept motivational (work) strivings. These strivings are presumed to give direction and intentionality to work actions, resulting in meaningful work and positive work outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction and performance) (Barrick et al., 2013). Research showed, for example, that motivational strivings relate to the extent to which employees seek and receive i-deals (Ng & Lucianetti, 2016), experience subjective well-being (Ehrlich & Bipp, 2016), or show personal initiative at work (Chiaburu & Carpenter, 2013). Three primary strivings are commonly identified (Barrick et al., 2013; Foulk et al., 2019; Ng & Lucianetti, 2016): status striving (i.e., the intention to be dominant and exert power and influence over others at work), communion striving (i.e., the intention to have meaningful personal relationships and get along with others at work), and achievement/accomplishment striving (i.e., the intention to demonstrate personal competence and attain a sense of accomplishment by accomplishing work tasks). Similar to career strivings, motivational strivings pertain to higher order goals in relation to work. However, career strivings focus on long-term, more general goals for the career overall. In contrast, motivational work strivings are more focused on the current job and what one generally wants to attain at work in the current organization. Moreover, our proposed career strivings framework includes strivings to contribute to others and the common good. In contrast, the motivational work striving framework includes social striving for communion, which pertains to having good social relationships at work.

Table 1 summarizes definitions, typical content domains, and similarities and differences of career strivings with the reviewed constructs. The meaningful distinctions between career strivings and other constructs caused us to develop and validate new items to assess the three career strivings more precisely. To establish differential construct validity, we expect to find that different career strivings are more closely related to some types of career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings than others. Specifically, due to the proposed nature of self-enhancement career strivings (i.e., focus on extrinsic goals in terms of power, prestige, and high income), they should be more strongly related to constructs that share this content domain (i.e., extrinsic career goals, self-enhancement work values, and status motivational work strivings) than with constructs that focus on different content domains (i.e., intrinsic career goals, self-transcendent and openness to change work values, and communion and achievement work strivings). The same logic applies to self-transcendent career strivings which due to their specific content focus (i.e., other-focused intrinsic goals in terms of helping others and contributing to society and the common good) should be more related to constructs with a similar content focus (i.e., intrinsic career goals, self-transcendence work values, and communion strivings) compared to constructs with a different focus (i.e., extrinsic career goals, self-enhancement and openness to change work values, and status and achievement motivational work strivings). Finally, personal growth career strivings due to their focus (i.e., self-focused intrinsic goals to grow personally, develop knowledge and skills, and do interesting work) should be more strongly related to similar content constructs (i.e., intrinsic career goals, openness to change work values, and achievement work strivings) compared to construct with a different content focus (i.e., extrinsic career goals, self-enhancement and self-transcendent work values, and status and communion work strivings).

Table 1.

Career Strivings and Closely Related Constructs: Definitions, Content Domains, Similarities, and Differences.

	Career Strivings	Extrinsic and Intrinsic Career Goals	Work Values	Motivational (Work) Strivings
Definition	“Long-term, enduring, values-related goals which represent what individuals are characteristically aiming at accomplishing in their careers and the purpose or purposes that a person is trying to carry out in their career” (this manuscript)	Extrinsic career goals: “The extent to which the individual’s career goals include extrinsically motivating attributes such as visible success, status, and influence within the organization or society, and high financial rewards” Intrinsic career goals: “The extent to which an individual’s career goals include intrinsically motivating attributes, such as continually gaining new skills and knowledge, having interesting and challenging work, and having the opportunity to do work that impacts society” (Seibert et al., 2013, p. 171)	“The relative importance individuals place on various aspects of work including desirable work settings and work-related outcomes” (Jin & Rounds, 2012, p. 327)	“Higher-order implicit goals or agendas the individual strives to attain […] which span relatively long time frames and are represented as generally desired end states that may be accessible to consciousness” (Barrick et al., 2013, p. 132f)
Typical content domains	Self-enhancement career strivings, self-transcendence career strivings, and personal growth career strivings	Extrinsic: Power, success, status, income, and money Intrinsic: Learning, personal growth, interesting work, variety, meaningful work, and social impact	Self-transcendent (i.e., altruism and social relationships), self-enhancement (i.e., pay and prestige), conservation (i.e., security and authority), and openness to change values (i.e., variety and autonomy)	Status striving; communion striving; achievement/accomplishment striving
Similarity with the proposed career strivings framework and measure	—	Both address the extent to which a person pursues self-enhancement, self-transcendence, and personal growth goals in career development	Both address work-related aspects that a person values in their career	Both focus on higher order goals that individuals aim to attain in their work lives
Difference to the proposed career strivings framework and measure	—	Long-term career goals related to self-transcendence are differentiated from long-term career goals related to personal growth in the proposed career strivings measure	Career strivings pertain to long-term career goals, while work values typically focus more on current job preferences	Motivational strivings focus on aims in the current job and organization while career strivings pertain to more general long-term career goals. Career strivings include self-transcendent strivings (i.e., helping others and contributing to society and the common good) while motivational strivings include strivings for communion (i.e., having meaningful relationships and getting along with others)

Hypothesis 1:

Self-enhancement career strivings are (a) more strongly related to extrinsic than intrinsic career goals, (b) more strongly related to pay and prestige than to altruism, relationships, variety, and autonomy work values, and (c) more strongly related to status than to communion and achievement work strivings.

Hypothesis 2:

Self-transcendent career strivings are (a) more strongly related to intrinsic than to extrinsic career goals, (b) more strongly related to altruism and relationships than to pay and prestige, variety, and autonomy work values, and (c) more strongly related to communion than to status and achievement work strivings.

Hypothesis 3:

Personal growth career strivings are (a) more strongly related to intrinsic than to extrinsic career goals, (b) more strongly related to variety and autonomy than to pay, prestige, altruism, and relationships work values, and (c) more strongly related to achievement than to status and communion work strivings.

Career Strivings and Work and Life Outcomes

Going beyond relations to similar constructs, we also wanted to further understand the importance of career strivings. We tested how the three career strivings relate to different career and life outcomes in terms of career commitment, career satisfaction, and life meaningfulness. We expect that career strivings are positively related to career commitment, defined as “one’s attitude towards one’s profession or vocation” (Blau, 1985, p. 278), specifically regarding one’s motivation to work in a chosen career role (in contrast to a specific job or organization). Based on the theory of purposeful work behavior (Barrick et al., 2013), we expect that career strivings direct career actions and choices in light of such strivings. Because career strivings give meaning and direction to one’s career, they should increase the motivation to be engaged in a specific career path that allows fulfilling these strivings. Based on attraction-selection-attrition processes (Schneider et al., 1995), we can expect that individuals will typically choose and remain in careers that allow them to progress toward attaining their central career strivings. Hence, we expect career strivings to relate to career commitment positively.

We propose that career strivings are also positively related to career satisfaction, the subjective summative evaluation of how a person feels about their career (Greenhaus et al., 1990). Based on the theory of purposeful work behavior (Barrick et al., 2013), we can expect that career strivings direct individuals toward actions that they perceive as meaningful, leading to satisfaction in the respective goal domain. This notion is supported by goal research (Locke & Latham, 2002; Sheldon, 2014), showing that attaining and making progress toward personally meaningful goals results in feelings of meaning and satisfaction. Hence, we expect that career strivings can give purpose and direction to a career. Making progress toward such meaningful goals, based on actions resulting from such strivings, should increase career satisfaction.

Finally, we expect that career strivings are positively related to life meaningfulness. Research generally shows a close association between work and general life experiences, for example, with a positive relation between job and career satisfaction and general life satisfaction and well-being (Judge & Watanabe, 1993; Spurk et al., 2019). Such relations can be explained by positive spill-over processes linking the work and non-work life domains (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). Applied to the current study context, because career strivings can provide purpose and meaning for one’s career, we expect this to positively impact the perceived meaning in life more generally.

To establish incremental validity of career strivings beyond existing measures of closely related constructs, we tested if career strivings relate to these theoretical outcomes beyond extrinsic and intrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings. We expect incremental validity for these outcomes because career strivings better differentiate between different forms of self- vs. other-oriented intrinsic career goals than existing frameworks/measures of career goals and because career strivings are more focused on the career more generally vs. a narrower focus on desired job characteristics or goals in the current workplace, as is typically the case in work values and motivational work strivings.

Hypothesis 4:

Career strivings are positively related to (a) career commitment, (b) career satisfaction, and (c) life meaningfulness beyond extrinsic and intrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings.

Step 1—Item Generation and Item Selection

Both authors independently reviewed existing items from published scales that measure closely related constructs in terms of career goals (Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Seibert et al., 2013), work values (Cable & Edwards, 2004; Lyons, 2010), general values (Schwartz et al., 2012), motivational orientations (Barrick et al., 2002), prosocial and service motivation (Duffy & Raque-Bogdan, 2010; Grant, 2008; Grant & Sumanth, 2009), and growth need strength (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). We jointly identified those items within these scales that corresponded to the content domains of the three proposed career strivings and adapted their wording slightly where necessary to be applicable for assessing career strivings (e.g., the item “It is important that my career offers me opportunities for interesting work,” from Seibert et al., 2013, was changed into “In my career, I strive to engage in interesting work”; the item “How important is this to you? Gaining respect,” from Cable & Edwards, 2004, was changed into “In my career, I strive to gain respect”). This process resulted in the creation of 56 career striving items (22 for self-enhancement, 23 for self-transcendence, and 11 for personal growth), all in the form of: “In my career, I strive to…” on a 5-point response scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Method

Sample and Procedure

The 56 items were tested with a sample from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) who were full-time workers (at least 35 working hours per week), currently living in the US, in an age range from 18 to 65 years old, and had an HIT approval rate greater than 95%. We excluded participants older than 65 years from our sample because, after that age, retirement issues typically become very salient, which could distort the meaning of career strivings. We only included participants with a 95% or higher HIT approval rate. This criterion enabled us to identify more skilled and qualified participants for our study. A participant’s HIT approval rate is calculated as the participant’s lifetime assignments approved within MTurk divided by the participant’s lifetime number of assignments submitted—on all assignments. Higher approval rates indicate that the participant has a better quality of work within MTurk.

In total, 454 eligible participants responded to the survey, with 389 providing the necessary data and completing three attention check items. The participants were 257 males, and their ages ranged from 23 to 63 years (M = 37.4, SD = 9.2). Around two-thirds of them were white (63.0%) and less than one-third Asian (28.3%). Most had an undergraduate or postgraduate degree (78%). The organizational tenure of the participants ranged from 1 to 36 years (M = 7.7, SD = 5.6). Participants were from various industries, including business and finance, computers and technology, sales and marketing, office administration and management, and education and teaching. Their average working time was 41.7 hours per week, ranging from 35 to 60 hours. The sample was randomly divided into two halves for Step 1 (Sample 1a; N = 195) and Step 2 (Sample 1b; N = 194).

Results

The 56 career striving items were analyzed using principal component analysis (PCA) with a Promax rotation. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value of the sample was .94. This indicated the high suitability of the data for structure detection. The eigenvalues, the scree plot, and a parallel analysis (Horn, 1965) all suggested a 4-factor solution, where the self-enhancement factor was split into a factor for income and wealth (i.e., “money”) and one for influence, prestige, and power (i.e., “power”), plus one factor each for self-transcendent and personal growth strivings. Closely examining the resulting factor loadings and item content revealed that the scale could be reduced to 14 items (Figure 1). We followed the following steps: (Stanton et al., 2002) We first removed all items with factor loadings smaller than .65. We then marked all items with item–item correlations higher than .70, looked at the content of those highly correlated items, and selected items that were not redundant in their content. Finally, we looked closer at the content of the remaining items and chose them for the final item pool if the selected items did not already cover their content.

Figure 1.

CFA Model Configuration of Career Striving Constructs in Step 2 (Sample 1b). Note. All p < .001. SE1 = In my career, I strive to have a high total compensation. SE2 = In my career, I strive to attain a high income. SE3 = In my career, I strive to become wealthy. SE4 = In my career, I strive to be seen as a powerful individual. SE5 = In my career, I strive to have influence over other people. SE6 = In my career, I strive to have others look up to me. ST1 = In my career, I strive to do good for others through my work. ST2 = In my career, I strive to make a difference for others. ST3 = In my career, I strive to respond to the needs of society. ST4 = In my career, I strive to contribute to the common good. PG1 = In my career, I strive to continue to learn and grow over the course of my career. PG2 = In my career, I strive to have stimulating and challenging work. PG3 = In my career, I strive to have opportunities for personal growth and development. PG4= In my career, I strive to learn continuously.

Step 2—Confirming Factor Structure in a New Sample

We used Sample 1b to confirm the factor structure of the selected 14 items from Step 1 with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and the “lavaan” package in R (Rosseel, 2012). Based on theoretical arguments that money and prestige are specific representations of self-enhancement strivings (Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Seibert et al., 2013), we specified a model with three correlated factors of self-enhancement, self-transcendence, and personal growth, where the self-enhancement factor was additionally indicted by two subfactors of money and power (Figure 1). The resulting goodness-of-fit indices indicated an excellent fit to the data ( $χ^{2}$ (73) = 189.36, CFI = .92, TLI = .90, AIC = 6522.59, SRMA = .11, and RMSEA = .09). All factor loadings were .64 or greater, and all were significant at p < .001. This model resulted in significant improvements in fit over alternative models where the three correlated career striving factors were specified without the two self-enhancement subfactors of money and power (CFI = .78 and RMSEA = .15 ${, χ}^{2}$ (1) = 207.91, p < .001) or where the three correlated career strivings factors loaded on a general first-order factor (CFI = .79 and RMSEA = .15, $χ^{2}$ (1) 198.25 p < .001).

Step 3—Establishing Nomological Net and Validity

In this last step, we wanted to confirm the factor structure of the new scales in another sample and a different cultural context. Because cultures differ meaningfully in dimensions of individualism-collectivism, uncertainty avoidance; power distance, or masculinity–femininity (Hofstede, 2001), the endorsement of specific career strivings could meaningfully differ across cultural contexts. Finally, we aimed to provide information on the nomological net of the different career strivings in relation to closely related constructs and their incremental validity for work and life outcomes.

Method

Participants and Procedure

Participants were recruited via an online panel in Germany. Of the 3′357 invited panelists, 1217 responded to the invitation and clicked the survey link (response rate 36.3%). Among them, 671 participants were removed because they either (1) did not pass the three attention check items (n = 23); or (2) did not fulfill one of the inclusion criteria (n = 648): (a) age between 18 and 65 years, (b) living in Germany, (c) full-time employees, and (d) quotas regarding age (3 intervals: 18–35; 36–50; and 51–65) and gender (50/50). We performed data quality checks on the remaining participants and removed 56 participants due to speeding (i.e., less than 2 seconds/item), straight-lining, or incorrect data (e.g., 170 working hours per week). The final sample for Time 1 (T1) consisted of 490 participants. At T1, we collected data on socio-demographic variables, the new career striving items, and variables to demonstrate distinctness validity: career goals, work values, and motivational strivings.

Two weeks later, participants were re-invited to participate in another set of surveys (T2), of which 452 responded to the invitation and clicked the survey link (response rate 92%). Among them, 32 participants were removed because they did not pass the three attention checks. We performed data quality checks on the remaining participants and removed 66 participants due to speeding (i.e., less than 2 seconds/item) or straight-lining. The final sample for T2 consisted of 354 participants. At T2, we collected data on work and life outcomes: career commitment, career satisfaction, and life meaningfulness.

Measurement

The means, standard deviations, bivariate correlations, and Cronbach’s alpha (α) of all measures can be found in supplementary Table S1. Unless otherwise indicated, items were translated from English into German using Brislin (1970)’s back-translation model by two research assistants and one co-author. Scale scores were calculated by averaging the scores of the corresponding items, with higher scores indicating a stronger endorsement of the assessed construct.

Career Strivings

The 14 items detailed in Step 1 were used to measure career strivings at T1 and T2 (see Figure 1) on a 5-point response scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The scale has demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha range = 0.87–0.92) and test–retest reliability over two weeks (range = 0.65–0.71) in our sample. The convergent and discriminant validity of the scale is investigated in the current paper.

Career Goals

We used items from Seibert et al. (2013) to assess extrinsic career goals with five items (e.g., “It is important to me to achieve financial success in my career”) and intrinsic career goals with three items (e.g., “It is important for me to continue to learn and grow over the course of my career”) on a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The scale showed good psychometric properties. In the original study (Seibert et al., 2013), the internal consistency for the extrinsic career goals subscale was found to be .74, whereas in our sample, it was .88. Similarly, the internal consistency for the intrinsic career goals subscale was .65 in the original study and .71 in our sample. The good convergent and discriminant validity were shown by having a positive correlation with other measures of career goals and career-related constructs, such as career planning, and a weak or non-existent correlation with measures of other constructs, such as financial ability (Seibert et al., 2013).

Work Values

Eight core work values representing altruism (e.g., “Making the world a better place”), relationships (e.g., “Forming relationships with coworkers”), pay (e.g., “Salary level”), security (e.g., “Being certain of keeping my job”), authority (e.g., “A clear chain of command”), prestige (e.g., “Gaining respect”), variety (e.g., “Doing something different every day”), and autonomy (e.g., “Doing my work in my own way”) were measured using three items each from the scales provided by Cable and Edwards (2004) with the German language version by Hirschi (2011). Respondents answered the question “How important is this to you?” and the responses ranged from 1 (not important) to 5 (very important). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the eight core work values subscales ranged from .73 to .87 in the original study (Cable & Edwards, 2004) and .73 to .93 in our sample. Previous research supported the scale’s construct validity by showing that self-transcendent values were significantly positively and conservation values negatively related to the presence of a calling (Hirschi, 2011) and that different values were significantly positively related to job satisfaction and organizational identification (Cable & Edwards, 2004).

Motivational Strivings

Three motivational strivings representing achievement striving (e.g., “It is very important to me that I complete a lot of work.“), status striving (e.g., “I focus my attention on being the best employee in the office”), and communion striving (e.g., “I spend a lot of time contemplating whether my coworkers like me”) were measured with six items each from Ng and Lucianetti (2016). The items were assessed with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The measure demonstrated good internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .81 for achievement striving, .92 for status striving, and .88 for communion striving in the original study (Ng & Lucianetti, 2016). In our sample, the internal consistency coefficients were .66, .93, and .85, respectively. Research supported the construct validity of the scale by showing positive relations of different strivings to in-role performance and citizenship behaviors (Ng & Lucianetti, 2016).

Career Commitment

We used Blau (1985)’s 8-item measure to assess an individual’s commitment to their profession or vocation (e.g., “This is the ideal profession for a working life”). The items were assessed with a 5-point scale from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (very true). The scale demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha range = .85–.87) and test–retest reliability over seven months (.67) in the original study (Blau, 1985). In our sample, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .65. The discriminant validity was supported by factor analysis results being distinguishable from job involvement and organizational commitment (Blau, 1985).

Career Satisfaction

We used the German Career Satisfaction Scale (Abele & Spurk, 2009; Greenhaus et al., 1990) with five items (e.g., “I am satisfied with the progress I have made towards meeting my overall career goals”). The items were assessed with a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). The scale is one-dimensional (61% explained item variance) and revealed good internal consistency, Cronbach’s α = .83 in the original study (Abele & Spurk, 2009). In our sample, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .92. Construct validity evidence for the scale includes positive correlations to a protean career orientation, job satisfaction, and work engagement (Herrmann et al., 2015).

Life Meaningfulness

Life meaningfulness was measured with the 5-item Meaning in Life Questionnaire-Presence subscale (Steger et al., 2006). Participants were asked to take a moment to think about what makes their lives feel important to them and respond to five statements (e.g., “My life has a clear sense of purpose”). The items were assessed with a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (absolutely untrue) to 7 (absolutely true). The internal consistency of the presence subscale is high (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = .86 in the original study, Steger et al., 2006, and .88 in our sample). The convergent validity of the scale was shown by positive correlations with life satisfaction, positive emotions, intrinsic religiosity, extraversion, and agreeableness and negatively correlated with depression, negative emotions, and neuroticism. Discriminant validity was shown by being uncorrelated with social desirability and extrinsic religiosity (Steger et al., 2006).

Considered Controls

Age was considered as a control because prosocial motivation generally increases and extrinsic motivations usually decline with age (Kooij et al., 2011). We considered organizational tenure as another age-related variable in the work context for the same reasons. Gender was controlled because women generally report more altruistic values and community orientation (Le et al., 2018; Wegemer & Eccles, 2019), while men typically endorse extrinsic values such as power or achievement (Konrad et al., 2000). Moreover, participants’ educational level was controlled because knowledge, skills, and abilities are personal factors that could affect career goal setting and pursuit (Hirschi & Koen, 2021).

Results and Discussion

Replicating Factor Structure in a New Sample

We first conducted a CFA with the sample from T1 (N = 490) to confirm that we could replicate the factor structure from Step 2 in a new sample and language version. The same procedure as Step 2 was used, which resulted in a very good fit of the presumed factor structure ( $χ^{2}$ (73) = 313.19, CFI = .95, TLI = .94, AIC = 15002.05, SRMA = .06, and RMSEA = .08). All factor loadings were .69 or greater, and all were significant at p < .001.

We also conducted measurement invariance tests to examine if the scale’s factor structure differs across different groups based on age, gender, organizational tenure, and educational level. Age (18–35 yrs., 36–49 yrs., and 50+ yrs.) and organizational tenure (1–7 yrs., 8–15 yrs., and 16+ yrs.) were divided into three categories, while gender (male vs. female) and education level (university degree vs. no university degree) were divided into two categories. The configural model was adequate across the three age groups (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, and RMSEA = 0.09), across the two gender groups (CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, and RMSEA = 0.09), across the three organizational tenure groups (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, and RMSEA = 0.09), as well as across the two education groups (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94, and RMSEA = 0.09). This supports that the factorial structure of the measure does not differ between the assessed groups. The metric model set the factor loadings to be equal across groups. This fit was also adequate for all four group variables (all CFI $\geq$ 0.94, TLI $\geq$ 0.93, and RMSEA $\leq$ 0.09), and there were inappreciable differences in CFI, TLI, and RMSEA between the configural and metric models. This indicates that there are not meaningful differences in how the items relate to their respective factors across the examined groups. Finally, scalar invariance was examined by placing restrictions on all item intercepts to be equal. The scalar model fit was also adequate for three group variables of age, gender, and educational level (all CFI $\geq$ 0.94, TLI $\geq$ 0.93, and RMSEA $\leq$ 0.09), and there were inappreciable differences in CFI, TLI, and RMSEA between the metric and scalar models. These findings supported strong invariance and showed no significant differences in item endorsement across age, gender, and educational level groups. The overall scalar model fit was significantly worse (△ $χ^{2}$ = 34.7, p < .05) for the group variable organizational tenure. Thus, the scalar invariance of the measurement cannot be held for this group variable, indicating that employees with different organizational tenure endorsed the career striving items differently.

Relations with Closely Related Constructs

To establish differential construct validity and test Hypotheses 1 to 3, we first examined the correlations of the career striving scales with the closely related constructs of extrinsic/intrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings (Table S1).

Supporting H1a to c, self-enhancement career strivings were more strongly related to extrinsic career goals (r = .75, p < .001) vs. intrinsic career goals (r = .30, p < .001; z = 12.0, p < .001); more to pay and prestige work values (r = .36 and .65, p < .001) vs. altruism (r = .22, p < .001), relationships (r = .21, p < .001), variety (r = .24, p < .001), and autonomy (r = .13, p < .01) work values (z ranges from 2.2 to 10.6, p ranges from .014 to <.001); and more strongly related to status work strivings (r = .62, p < .001) vs. communion (r = .41, p < .001) and achievement work strivings (r = .15, p < .01; z = 4.8 and 9.8, p < .001).

Self-transcendent career strivings were equally positively related to both intrinsic and extrinsic career goals (r = .37 and. 32, p < .001; z = 1.09, p = .138), refuting Hypothesis 2a. Partially supporting H2b, self-transcendent career strivings were more strongly related to altruism (r = .70, p < .001) vs. pay (r = .02, p > .05; z = 13.3, p < .001), prestige (r = .34, p < .001; z = 9.0, p < .001), variety (r = .35, p < .001; z = 8.9, p < .001), and autonomy (r = .27, p < .01; z = 9.7, p < .001) work values; self-transcendent career strivings were also more strongly related to relationships (r = .31, p < .001) vs. pay work values (z = 4.9, p < .001), but the correlation was not significantly different than to prestige, variety, or autonomy work values. Self-transcendent career strivings were also not more strongly related to communion work strivings (r = .27, p < .001) vs. status (r = .30, p < .001; z = −0.7, p = .239) and achievement (r = .26, p < .001; z = 0.2, p = .426) work strivings, refuting Hypothesis 2c.

Personal growth career strivings were more strongly related to intrinsic career goals (r = .65, p < .001) vs. extrinsic career goals (r = .34, p < .001; z = 7.7, p < .001), supporting Hypotheses 3a. Supporting Hypothesis 3b with one exception, personal growth career strivings were more strongly related to variety (r = .49, p < .001) vs. pay (r = .13, p < .01), prestige (r = .30, p < .001), altruism (r = .39, p < .001), and relationships (r = .20, p < .001) work values (z ranges from 2.3 to 6.8, p ranges from .017 to <.001); personal growth career strivings were also more strongly related to autonomy (r = .44, p < .001) vs. pay, prestige, and relationships work values (z ranges from 2.7 to 5.7, p ranges from .004 to <.001), but not significantly stronger than to altruism work value (z = 1.09, p = .138). Finally, personal growth career strivings were more strongly related to achievement (r = .31, p < .001) vs. communion work strivings (r = .16, p < .001; z = 2.8, p < .01) but not vs. status work strivings (r = .28, p < .001; z = 0.6, p = .283), partially supporting Hypothesis 3c.

Incremental Validity for Work and Life Outcomes

To examine the incremental validity of the new career striving measures, we tested how the three career strivings assessed at T1 relate to different career and life outcomes in terms of career commitment, career satisfaction, and life meaningfulness (assessed at T2) beyond extrinsic and intrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings (assessed at T1). We used hierarchical regression to test our hypotheses with the sample who completed both measurement points (N = 334; Table 2). In the first step, we entered demographics (i.e., age, gender, organizational tenure, and educational level) as control variables. In the second step, we added the career goals subscales, work values subscales, as well as motivational strivings subscales, and in the third step, we added the three career striving subscales. We used this approach to investigate the relations between the predictors and outcome variables while controlling for the effects of other variables.

Table 2.

Prediction of Occupational Commitment, Career Satisfaction, and Life Meaningfulness Beyond Career Goals, Work Values, and Motivational Strivings Using Hierarchical Regression Analyses (Study 1, Step 3).

Predictors	Career Commitment			Career Satisfaction			Life Meaningfulness
Block1: Demographics
Age	−0.00	−0.00	−0.00	−0.00	−0.00	−0.00	0.01	0.01	0.01
Organizational tenure	−0.00	−0.00	−0.00	0.01	0.01	0.01	−0.00	−0.00	−0.00
Gender	−0.05	0.02	0.03	−0.09	−0.02	−0.01	−0.16	−0.06	−0.01
Education	0.05^*	0.02	0.01	0.02	−0.02	−0.02	0.01	−0.02	−0.03
Block 2
Career goals
Intrinsic career goals		0.13^*	0.07		0.20^**	0.11		0.31^**	0.17
Extrinsic career goals		0.09	0.08		0.06	0.04		0.02	0.07
Work values
Altruism		0.16^***	0.15^**		−0.01	−0.04		0.10	0.04
Relationships		0.08	0.08		0.15^*	0.15^*		0.14	0.15^*
Pay		−0.09	−0.09		−0.06	−0.07		0.15	0.19
Prestige		−0.03	−0.04		0.03	0.00		0.01	0.01
Security		0.10	0.08		0.00	−0.03		−0.04	−0.07
Authority		−0.06	−0.05		−0.07	−0.05		0.05	0.08
Variety		−0.01	−0.02		0.01	−0.00		−0.15	−0.18
Autonomy		0.09	0.06		0.14	0.10		0.13	0.06
Motivational strivings
Achievement striving		0.14^*	0.12		0.18^*	0.14		0.22*	0.18
Status striving		0.00	0.01		0.00	0.00		−0.00	0.04
Communion striving		−0.11^*	−0.10^*		−0.13	−0.12		−0.15	−0.14
Block 3: Career strivings
Self-enhancement			0.01			0.05			−0.15
Self-transcendence			0.00			0.01			0.03
Personal growth			0.14^*			0.19^*			0.29^*
$R^{2}$	.02	.24^***	.25^***	.01	.14^***	.15^***	.02	.14^***	.17^***
$∆ R^{2}$		.22^***	.01		.13^***	.01		.12^***	.03^*

Note. N = 334. Gender: 1 = male, 2 = female.

*p < .05, **p < .01, and ***p < .01 (two-tailed).

Personal growth strivings predicted significant variance in (a) career commitment ( $β$ = 0.14, p < .05), (b) career satisfaction ( $β$ = 0.19, p < .05), and (c) life meaningfulness ( $β$ = 0.29, p < .05) beyond controls and extrinsic and intrinsic career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings, confirming Hypothesis 4. However, self-enhancement and self-transcendence career striving did not predict any unique variance beyond the other variables in the model. Together (Block 3), all three career strivings explained 1% additional variances in career commitment, 1% in career satisfaction, and 3% in life meaningfulness beyond all the controls and all other related constructs. To provide a more specific test of incremental validity, we also assessed how the three career strivings predicted variance in the outcomes beyond career goals, work values, and motivational strivings individually (supplementary Tables S2-S4). As shown in Tables S2-S4, the three strivings predicted between 5% and 11% additional variance in career commitment (Table S2), 3% and 8% in career satisfaction (Table S3), and 3% and 7% in life meaningfulness (Table S4).

The results showed that the three career strivings could be reliably measured with English and German language items and represent related but distinct factors of career strivings. We could also show that the three career strivings are mostly differentially related to similar constructs in terms of career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings. Substantiating the utility of career strivings, we found that they are significantly and positively related to important work and life outcomes regarding career commitment, career satisfaction, and life meaningfulness.

General Discussion

The general aim of the current paper was to examine the role of different career strivings in career self-management. We thereby contribute to a better understanding of why and for which purposes individuals self-manage their careers, specifically, the implications of such career strivings for work and life outcomes. This makes a meaningful contribution to understanding better how individuals can lead self-directed and values-driven protean careers (Hall et al., 2018) by focusing on why and for which purpose(s) individuals self-manage their careers (Hirschi & Koen, 2021).

Existing research in the career domain has distinguished between extrinsic and intrinsic career goals (Greco & Kraimer, 2020; Hall et al., 2018; Seibert et al., 2013). We suggested and empirically confirmed a more fine-grained analysis of more other-focused and more self-focused intrinsic career strivings in terms of factorial structure and different relations to work and life outcomes. In addition, we found that extrinsic career strivings have two related but distinct facets: money and prestige. While it was beyond the scope of the present article, this suggests that future research could focus more on potentially differential relations of these two extrinsic facets to personal dispositions, behaviors, and work/life outcomes.

We moreover confirmed that career strivings are mostly differentially related to existing measures of career goals, work values, and motivational work strivings. The results support especially the distinct relation of self-enhancement and personal growth career strivings to different career goals, work values, and motivational strivings. This suggests that individuals with such career strivings endorse quite distinct goals, values, and work strivings. For self-transcendence career strivings, the results were less clear and suggest this career striving can co-occur with a larger range of different career goals, work values, and motivational strivings. This implies that the desire to contribute to the greater good in one’s career is a more versatile career orientation, compatible with a variety of other career attitudes. These results contribute to a better understanding of the underlying motivations and unique characteristics of different career orientations.

Career Strivings are Positively Related to Favorable Work and Life Outcomes

Supporting the added value of career strivings beyond these closely related constructs and existing measures, we could confirm incremental validity in explaining work and life outcomes. The intrinsic career strivings of self-transcendence and personal growth were positively correlated with favorable work (i.e., career commitment and career satisfaction) and life outcomes (i.e., life meaningfulness). This confirms research on the positive effects of intrinsic goals for life outcomes more generally (Kasser & Ryan, 1996). In light of the theory of purposeful work behavior (Barrick et al., 2013), the specific results of the current paper can be interpreted as career strivings guiding career actions and choices in light of such strivings and that these actions and preferences contain a sense meaning, satisfaction, and purpose because they are linked with values-related goals. This then manifests in higher levels of commitment toward one’s career, higher overall satisfaction with one’s career, and a greater sense of meaningfulness in life.

Personal growth career strivings positively related to all three examined outcomes beyond other constructs and other career strivings. While it is generally established that intrinsic goals are favorable for satisfaction and well-being (Kasser, 2016; Kasser & Ryan, 1996), existing research mainly did not distinguish between self-focused and other-focused intrinsic goals. Our findings contribute to the literature by suggesting that personal growth career strivings positively affect work and life outcomes beyond self-transcendence strivings.

Self-enhancement career strivings were also positively correlated with career commitment and career satisfaction. This suggests that extrinsic self-focused strivings can be a positive motivational source for career commitment and attainment. This aligns with research showing a positive relation between ambition (often measured as aiming to attain extrinsic rewards) and objective career attainment (Ashby & Schoon, 2010; Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012). However, our study did not find a significant relation between self-enhancement career strivings and life meaningfulness. This suggests that extrinsic career strivings are not beneficial for attaining more general psychological well-being—a finding in line with research showing negative relations of extrinsic life goals with well-being more generally (Kasser, 2016; Kasser & Ryan, 1996).

Limitations and Future Research

We could confirm our measurement of different career strivings in other languages and cultural contexts and separated predictor and outcome variables by time lags to reduce common method variance. However, all data were based on self-reports. It would be informative for future studies to investigate to what extent self-reported career strivings are related to behaviors or other outcomes (e.g., job performance) rated by others (e.g., supervisors). We moreover focused on the relations between different career strivings and career and life outcomes. Future studies could expand this inquiry and examine how different career strivings relate to other career and life outcomes, for example, the attainment of different types of career success (e.g., meaningful work vs. influence). Such research would further advance the understanding of the differential outcomes associated with different kinds of career strivings, including illuminating which positive, but potentially also adverse, outcomes are related to different types of career strivings.

Expanding on this point, the current paper focused on theoretical correlates and outcomes of career strivings. Future studies could also examine why individuals have different strivings, how career strivings emerge and change over time, and which factors affect such changes. Moreover, in the current study, we focused on specific career strivings relative to other strivings. However, as our research shows, different strivings are positively correlated, which means that individuals typically hold more than one type of striving. Future studies could therefore examine combinations of career strivings with person-centered approaches, such as latent profile analysis (Spurk et al., 2020), to discuss how individuals with varying combinations of career strivings engage in career self-management behaviors or how different profiles of strivings are related to outcomes.

Finally, our finding that personal growth career strivings positively relate to all three examined outcomes could reflect the cultural context of the studies. The Germanic culture is generally considered high in individualism (Hofstede, 2001). Personal attainment, development, and growth are thus usually highly valued in the current study’s career and work context. Future studies could aim to replicate and expand the presented findings in other cultural contexts.

Practice Implications and Conclusion

As our results suggest, having strong career strivings can give meaning and direction to careers, promoting commitment and satisfaction in one’s career, and generally finding more purpose in life. Based on this knowledge, career counselors could help clients appraise their career strivings and the longer term, value-related goals they wish to attain in their careers. For example, counselors could assess career strivings with the presented scales and foster a reflection to clarify career strivings, which could act as motivational forces and guidance in career self-management. Such reflection could be based on identifying what clients strive for in their lives, which values guide their career development, and what are some of the ultimate goals they wish to attain at the end of their careers. Counselors could then discuss with clients which career self-management behaviors might be helpful to realize their specific strivings. This would help clients engage in actions that align with their values and help them progress toward personally meaningful career goals.

To conclude, the studies have highlighted the relevance of general, long-term agendas and purposes individuals wish to attain in their careers: their career strivings. We could show that individuals pursue different career strivings in terms of their extrinsic, intrinsic, self-focused, and other-focused nature. These strivings are, in turn, related to work and life outcomes. We hope that this paper serves as an impetus for future research to focus more on the why and for which purpose(s) individuals self-manage their careers and to understand better how individuals can successfully manage their protean careers in a self-directed and value-driven way.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Pursuing Money and Power, Prosocial Contributions, or Personal Growth: Measurement and Nomological Net of Different Career Strivings

Supplemental Material for Pursuing Money and Power, Prosocial Contributions, or Personal Growth: Measurement and Nomological Net of Different Career Strivings by Andreas Hirschi and Dandan Pang in Journal of Career Development.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Stephanie Burri for her assistance on the project.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Andreas Hirschi

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biographies

Andreas Hirschi, Ph.D., is a full professor and chair of the Department of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Bern, Switzerland, and a professorial research fellow at the Department of Management at Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. He obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Zurich and a Master of Advanced Studies in Psychology of Career Counseling and Human Resources Management from the Universities of Zurich, Berne, and Fribourg, Switzerland. His major research interests are in the field of career development and career counseling and focus on self-directed career management, older workers, career success, and the work–non-work interface. In his leisure time, he enjoys rock climbing, mountain biking, and ski touring.

Dandan Pang, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of mindfulness and positive workplace at the Business School of the Bern University of Applied Sciences, and an affiliated researcher at the Department of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Bern. Her research is dedicated to measuring, characterizing, and improving the well-being of employees in the workplace, utilizing methods such as psychometric scales, computational linguistic analysis, and facial action coding system (FACS). She obtained her Ph.D. in social and personality psychology at the University of Zurich and completed research stays in 2018 and 2021 at the University of Pennsylvania. In her free time, she loves tea, calligraphy, reading, traveling, and exploring different cultures.

References

Abele

A. E.

Spurk

(2009). The longitudinal impact of self-efficacy and career goals on objective and subjective career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.10.005

Ashby

J. S.

Schoon

(2010). Career success: The role of teenage career aspirations, ambition value and gender in predicting adult social status and earnings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(3), 350–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Jvb.2010.06.006

Bandura

(2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x

Barrick

M. R.

Mount

M. K.

(2013). The theory of purposeful work behavior: The role of personality, higher-order goals, and job characteristics. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 132–153. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0479

Barrick

M. R.

Stewart

G. L.

Piotrowski

(2002). Personality and job performance: Test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.1.43

Blau

G. J.

(1985). The measurement and prediction of career commitment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58(4), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1985.tb00201.x

Brislin

R. W.

(1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301

Cable

D. M.

Edwards

J. R.

(2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 822–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.822

Chiaburu

D. S.

Carpenter

N. C.

(2013). Employees' motivation for personal initiative the joint influence of status and communion striving. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(2), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000089

10.

Crocker

Canevello

Brown

A. A.

(2017). Social motivation: Costs and benefits of selfishness and otherishness. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 299–325. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044145

11.

Dawis

R. V.

Lofquist

L. H.

(1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment: An individual differences model and its applications. University of Minnesota Press.

12.

Deckop

J. R.

Jurkiewicz

C. L.

Giacalone

R. A.

(2010). Effects of materialism on work-related personal well-being. Human Relations, 63(7), 1007–1030. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709353953

13.

Dik

B. J.

Sargent

A. M.

Steger

M. F.

(2008). Career development strivings: Assessing goals and motivation in career decision-making and planning. Journal of Career Development, 35(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845308317934

14.

Dittmar

Bond

Hurst

Kasser

(2014). The relationship between materialism and personal well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(5), 879–924. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037409

15.

Duffy

R. D.

Raque-Bogdan

T. L.

(2010). The motivation to serve others: Exploring relations to career development. Journal of Career Assessment, 18(3), 250–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072710364791

16.

Duffy

R. D.

Sedlacek

W. E.

(2007). What is most important to students' long-term career choices:analyzing 10-year trends and group differences. Journal of Career Development, 34(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845307307472

17.

Edwards

J. R.

Rothbard

N. P.

(2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs. The Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 178–199. https://doi.org/10.2307/259269

18.

Ehrlich

Bipp

(2016). Goals and subjective well-being: Further evidence for goal-striving reasons as an additional level of goal analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 89(2016), 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.001

19.

Emmons

R. A.

(1986). Personal strivings: An approach to personality and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(5), 1058–1068. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.5.1058

20.

Erdogan

Kraimer

M. L.

Liden

R. C.

(2004). Work value congruence and intrinsic career success: The compensatory roles of leader-member exchange and perceived organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 57(2), 305–332

21.

Foulk

T. A.

Lanaj

Krishnan

(2019). The virtuous cycle of daily motivation: Effects of daily strivings on work behaviors, need satisfaction, and next-day strivings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(6), 755–775. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000385

22.

Grant

A. M.

(2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48

23.

Grant

A. M.

Sumanth

J. J.

(2009). Mission possible? The performance of prosocially motivated employees depends on manager trustworthiness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 927–944. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014391

24.

Greco

L. M.

Kraimer

M. L.

(2020). Goal-setting in the career management process: An identity theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(1), 40–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000424

25.

Greenhaus

J. H.

Parasuraman

Wormley

W. M.

(1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. The Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.2307/256352

26.

Grouzet

F. M. E.

Kasser

Ahuvia

Dols

J. M. F.

Kim

Lau

(2005). The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 800–816. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.800

27.

Hackman

J. R.

Oldham

G. R.

(1980). Work redesign. Addition-Wesley.

28.

Hall

D. T.

Mirvis

P. H.

(1996). The new protean career: Psychological success and the path with a heart. In Hall

D. T.

& Associates (Eds.), The career is dead - long live the career. A relational approach to careers (pp. 15–45). Jossey-Bass.

29.

Hall

D. T.

Yip

Doiron

(2018). Protean careers at work: Self-direction and values orientation in psychological success. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104631

30.

Herrmann

Hirschi

Baruch

(2015). The protean career orientation as predictor of career outcomes: Evaluation of incremental validity and mediation effects. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88(2015), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.03.008

31.

Hinkin

T. R.

(1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819800100106

32.

Hirschi

(2011). Callings in career: A typological approach to essential and optional components. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(1), 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.11.002

33.

Hirschi

Koen

(2021). Contemporary career orientations and career self-management: A review and integration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 126(2021), 103505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103505

34.

Hofstede

(2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks.

35.

Horn

J. L.

(1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447

36.

Jin

Rounds

(2012). Stability and change in work values: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 326–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.10.007

37.

Judge

T. A.

Bretz

R. D.

(1992). Effects of work values on job choice decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(3), 261–271.

38.

Judge

T. A.

Kammeyer-Mueller

J. D.

(2012). On the value of aiming high: The causes and consequences of ambition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), 758–775. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0028084

39.

Judge

T. A.

Watanabe

(1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 939–948

40.

Kasser

(2016). Materialistic values and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 67(1), 489–514. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033344

41.

Kasser

Ryan

R. M.

(1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296223006

42.

Konrad

A. M.

Ritchie

J. E.

Lieb

Corrigall

(2000). Sex differences and similarities in job attribute preferences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126(4), 593–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.593

43.

Kooij

D. T.

De Lange

A. H.

Jansen

P. G.

Kanfer

Dikkers

J. S.

(2011). Age and work-related motives: Results of a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 197–225. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.665

44.

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

45.

B. M.

Impett

E. A.

Lemay

E. P.

Jr. Muise

Tskhay

K. O.

(2018). Communal motivation and well-being in interpersonal relationships: An integrative review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000133

46.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

(2013). Social cognitive model of career self-management: Toward a unifying view of adaptive career behavior across the life span. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(4), 557–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033446

47.

Locke

E. A.

Latham

G. P.

(2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705

48.

Lyons

S. S.

(2010). How do people make continence care happen? An analysis of organizational culture in two nursing homes. Gerontologist, 50(3), 327–339. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnp157

49.

Lyons

S. T.

Higgins

C. A.

Duxbury

(2010). Work values: Development of a new three-dimensional structure based on confirmatory smallest space analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(7), 969–1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.658

50.

Moynihan

D. P.

DeLeire

Enami

(2015). A life worth living: Evidence on the relationship between prosocial values and happiness. American Review of Public Administration, 45(3), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013493657

51.

T. W. H.

Lucianetti

(2016). Goal striving, idiosyncratic deals, and job behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2023

52.

Ros

Schwartz

S. H.

Surkiss

(1999). Basic individual values, work values, and the meaning of work. Applied Psychology, 48(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1999.tb00048.x

53.

Rosseel

(2012). Lavaan: An R Package for structural equation modeling and more: Version 0.5-12 (BETA). Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

54.

Savickas

M. L.

(2013). Career construction theory and practice. In Brown

S. D.

Lent

R. W.

(Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (2nd ed., pp. 42–70). Wiley.

55.

Schneider

Goldstein

H. W.

Smith

D. B.

(1995). The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 747–773. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01780.x

56.

Schwartz

S. H.

Cieciuch

Vecchione

Davidov

Fischer

Beierlein

(2012). Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4), 663–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0029393

57.

Seibert

S. E.

Kraimer

M. L.

Holtom

B. C.

Pierotti

A. J.

(2013). Even the best laid plans sometimes go askew: Career self-management processes career shocks, and the decision to pursue graduate education. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030882

58.

Sheldon

K. M.

(2014). Becoming oneself: The central role of self-concordant goal selection. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(4), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314538549

59.

Sheldon

K. M.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

Kasser

(2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: it’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(4), 475–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203261883

60.

Spurk

Hirschi

Dries

(2019). Antecedents and outcomes of objective versus subjective career success: Competing perspectives and future directions. Journal of Management, 45(1), 35–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318786563

61.

Spurk

Hirschi

Wang

Valero

Kauffeld

(2020). Latent profile analysis: A review and “how to” guide of its application within vocational behavior research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 120(2020), 103445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103445

62.

Stanton

J. M.

Sinar

E. F.

Balzer

W. K.

Smith

P. C.

(2002). Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 167–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00108.x

63.

Steger

M. F.

Frazier

Oishi

Kaler

(2006). The meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(1), 80–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80

64.

Unanue

Rempel

Gomez

M. E.

Van den Broeck

(2017). When and why does materialism relate to employees’ attitudes and well-being: The mediational role of need satisfaction and need frustration. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1755. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01755

65.

Wang

Chen

(2022). Success or growth? Distinctive roles of extrinsic and intrinsic career goals in high-performance work systems, job crafting, and job performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 135(2022), 103714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103714

66.

Wegemer

C. M.

Eccles

J. S.

(2019). Gendered STEM career choices: Altruistic values, beliefs, and identity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110(2019), 28–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.020

67.

Zhang

(2018). The effect of intrinsic and extrinsic goals on work performance: Prospective and empirical studies on goal content theory. Personnel Review, 47(4), 900–912. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2017-0086

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.35 MB