When Reality Meets Ideal

Abstract

The present research investigated the short- and long-term relation between calling and life satisfaction and tested new mechanisms underlying this relation. Based on self-discrepancy theory and the calling model of career success, we assumed that people who are living their calling feel high self-congruence between their actual and ideal self and a high engagement orientation, which, in turn, enhances life satisfaction. In two studies, Study 1 with a cross-sectional design (N = 235 professionals) and Study 2 with three points of measurement (N = 248 nurses), we employed structural equation models to test our hypotheses as well as alternative models. Results showed that the realization of one’s calling in the world of employment affects not only a person’s current life satisfaction but also his or her life satisfaction measured 16 weeks later. Further, in both studies, the relation between calling and life satisfaction was mediated by self-congruence and engagement orientation. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Keywords

calling life satisfaction self-congruence engagement orientation

Too much and for too long, we seem to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things.

Kennedy,1968, p. 4

Robert Kennedy’s (1968) criticism of the gross national product and the dominant value this variable still has for society resonate with an increasing number of professionals who have started to rethink their career paths and search for more human ways of working (see Hänsel, 2009; Hohr, 2009). Hereby, the construct of calling, which is defined as the realization of one’s full potential in the world of employment, that is guided by a transcendent force and goes along with the experience of sense and meaning (cf. Dik, Eldridge, Steger, & Duffy, 2012; Elangovan, Pinder, & McLean, 2010; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012; Hunter, Dik, & Banning, 2010), has become increasingly important due to its positive consequences on a person’s well-being and health (e.g., Bunderson & Thompson, 2009; Dik & Duffy, 2009; Peterson, Park, Hall, & Seligman, 2009). Apart from work-related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction and organizational commitment), recent cross-sectional studies have shown that calling is also positively related to life satisfaction (cf. Duffy, Allan, Autin, & Bott, 2013; Duffy, Allan, & Bott, 2012; Duffy, Manuel, Borges, & Bott, 2011; Hirschi & Herrmann, 2012; Peterson et al., 2009).

This study aims at extending this line of research by (a) investigating new mechanisms underlying the relation between calling and life satisfaction and (b) testing whether the relation between the realization of one’s calling and a person’s life satisfaction is longer lasting. Based on discrepancy theory (e.g., Higgins, 1987; Michalos, 1985), we assume that called people are more satisfied with their life in general because they experience “outer” congruence (defined as the fit between a person and his/her environment) as well as “inner” congruence (defined as the fit between a person’s ideal self and actual self), which, in turn, influences life satisfaction (e.g., Ogilvie & Clark, 1992). In line with the calling model of career success (Hall & Chandler, 2005), we also assume that people are not called to be but called to act and to engage in their work to fulfill their mission. Engagement, in turn, is a predictor of life satisfaction (Seligman, 2011).

Outer Congruence: The Realization of One’s Calling in the World of Employment

In line with recent conceptualizations of the construct of calling (e.g., Dik et al., 2012; Elangovan et al., 2010; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012; Hunter et al., 2010), we see calling as a multidimensional construct whereby the following facets can be differentiated. First, people who are able to realize their calling in the world of employment often experience a perfect fit between their interests and skills and the requirements of their job (Elangovan et al., 2010; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012). Thus, called people often identify themselves with their work and realize their full potential while performing their work. Second, called people show value-driven behavior (e.g., altruism and morality) while performing their work and hope to contribute to the good of humanity (Bunderson & Thompson, 2009; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012; Praskova, Creed, & Hood, 2014). Hence, it is comprehensible that called people also derive a sense and meaning from performing their work (cf. Dik et al., 2012; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012; Hunter et al., 2010). Third, some people with a calling also experience a transcendent guiding force (e.g., God or an inner voice), which makes them feel secure about their career path and certain that they are doing the right thing (cf. Dik et al., 2012; Elangovan et al., 2010; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012; Hunter et al., 2010; Zhang, Dik, Wei, & Zhang, 2014). In sum, in realizing one’s calling, the person seems to experience “outer” congruence in the workplace.

As the three aforementioned facets of calling are all positively related to life satisfaction (see Zullig, Ward, & Horn, 2006: inner mission/spirituality/religiousness and life satisfaction; Steger, Oishi, & Kesebir, 2011: meaning and life satisfaction; Edwards, 1991: person-environment fit and life satisfaction), we assume in our first hypothesis that the realization of one’s calling has a positive direct effect on life satisfaction.

This assumption is in line with recent cross-sectional studies, which found positive correlations between the presence of calling and life satisfaction among college students (Duffy et al., 2012; Duffy & Sedlacek, 2010) and working adults (Davidson & Caddell, 1994; Duffy et al., 2013; Peterson et al., 2009; Wrzesniewski, McCauley, Rozin, & Schwartz, 1997). The results of these studies have not been verified yet applying a long-term perspective. Further, in most of these studies calling is conceptualized as the presence of a calling (individual level of perception that he or she has a calling). Yet, recent theory suggests a distinction between (a) the search for one’s calling, (b) the presence of one’s calling, and (c) the realization of one’s calling (cf. Duffy et al., 2013; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012). Working adults may, for instance, experience a calling but are not able to live it due to external or internal constraints (e.g., economic situation of a country, hostile work environment, physical disability; see Berg, Grant, & Johnson, 2010). Further, Duffy, Allan, Autin, and Bott (2013) also report empirical support for the distinction between calling and life satisfaction. Thus, the present study aims at investigating the short-term and long-term relation between the realization of one's calling and life satisfaction, whereby calling is defined as a multidimensional construct.

Inner Congruence: I Am What I Want to Be

A recent cross-sectional study by Duffy et al. (2013) showed that the relation between living a calling and life satisfaction is mediated by job satisfaction and life meaning. As this mediation is only partial, we aim to investigate the role of two other mediators: self-congruence and engagement orientation. Specifically, we assume that the self-perception and the engagement orientation of people who realize their calling might influence their life satisfaction.

The assumption that self-perception has an impact on the relation between living one’s calling and life satisfaction is theoretically based on Higgins’ (1987) self-discrepancy theory, which assumes that people have an actual self (attributes a person believes he/she currently possesses), an ought self (attributes a person believes he/she should possess), and an ideal self (attributes a person wishes to possess). The theory states that if the actual self is similar to the ought or ideal self, then people experience self-congruence. However, if the actual self deviates from the ought self or the ideal self, then a person experiences self-discrepancy. If people experience a calling, but are not (yet) able to live it, discrepancy between their actual and ideal selves may arise, resulting in thoughts such as, “I want to be brave and live my dream” or “I need to be more persistent to realize my dream.” In contrast, if people are able to realize their calling in the world of employment, they should experience congruence between their actual and ideal selves and should be able to say, “I am what I want to be” (cf. Elangovan et al., 2010). Thus, we assume in Hypothesis 2 that the realization of one’s calling has a positive direct effect on self-congruence.

Moreover, Hall and Chandler (2005) propose in their calling model of career success that people, who are able to realize their calling, actively try to use their strengths and aptitudes and engage in more learning cycles. As a consequence, called people’s self-efficacy, task performance, and satisfaction are likely to rise (for empirical evidence of these paths see Caprara, Barbaranelli, Steca, & Malone, 2006; Hirschi, 2012; Hagmaier & Abele, 2014). In line with the calling model of career success, Elangovan, Pinder, and McLean (2010) found that people who experience a calling toward a particular kind of work have an action orientation. This means that they do not simply feel called to be but rather called to act and to carry out their specific mission. Thus, we suppose in Hypothesis 3 that the realization of one’s calling has a positive direct effect on a person’s engagement orientation.

Mechanisms Underlying the Calling–Life Satisfaction Relation

According to contemporary models of the self (Cervone, 2005; McConnell, 2011), a person’s well-being is affected by the content and structural organization of a person’s different “parts” of the self. Discrepancy among the different parts of the self leads to emotional distress, dissatisfaction, and disappointment (e.g., Carver, Lawrence, & Scheier, 1999; Higgins, Klein, & Strauman, 1985). A congruent self, with one’s ideals in harmony with one’s actual self, is positively related to life satisfaction (e.g., Ogilvie & Clark, 1992), as it facilitates a clear and efficient course of action and results in a feeling of wholeness or unity (cf., Reich, Kessel, & Bernieri, 2013). Thus, we assume in Hypothesis 4 that the realization of one’s calling has a positive indirect effect on life satisfaction mediated by self-congruence.

Further, according Seligman’s well-being theory (2011), an engagement orientation is positively correlated with life satisfaction (cf. Körner, Reitzle, & Silbereisen, 2012; Ruch, Harzer, Proyer, Park, & Peterson, 2010). Thus, we assume in Hypothesis 5 that the realization of one’s calling has a positive indirect effect on life satisfaction mediated by engagement orientation.

The Present Research

In the following we will present two studies that aim at extending previous research by investigating the short-term and long-term relation between the realization of one’s calling in the world of employment and life satisfaction. We used structural equation models to test our assumptions and developed alternative models to shed some light on the directionality of the relation between calling and life satisfaction. Further, based on Higgins’ self-discrepancy theory (1987) and the calling model of career success (Hall & Chandler, 2005), the present research aimed to test whether actual and ideal self-congruence and engagement orientation were mediators of the calling–life satisfaction relation.

Study 1: Short-term Relation Between Calling and Life Satisfaction

The purpose of this first cross-sectional study was to test whether self-congruence and engagement orientation were mediators of the calling-life satisfaction relation. We tested our assumptions using a heterogeneous sample of professionals.

Method

Participants and Procedure

To test our hypotheses, we invited a total of 552 professionals via e-mail to take part in an online survey (response rate 42.57%). We knew participants’ e-mail address, as they subscribed in an e-mail distribution list to receive a newsletter about previous and upcoming psychological research from our institute. Participation was voluntary, and the participants received no payment. As an incentive, we offered participants to inform them about the general results of the study. The final sample comprised 235 German professionals (178 females, 57 males; mean age = 36.20, SD = 10.47; 56.6% living with a partner). More than half (56.2%) of the participants held a university degree (German diploma or a masters). The participants reported an average workload of 39.97 hr per week (SD = 7.66) and worked in different occupations (e.g., teacher, engineer). These occupations were later categorized into two sectors of employment (interrater reliability, Cohen’s κ = .94). In total, 73.2% of the participants worked in the business and economic sector and 26.8% in the educational and health sector. As this study was conducted in Germany and the questionnaire was also in German, we did not assess participants’ ethnicity.

Measures

Calling

The realization of one’s calling was assessed with the Multidimensional Calling Measure (MCM; Hagmaier & Abele, 2012). This measure consists of three subscales with 3 items each: (a) transcendent guiding force (TGF), (b) sense and meaning and value-driven behavior (SMVB), and (c) identification and person-environment-fit (IP). Sample items are “I follow an inner call that guides me on my career path” (TGF), “My job helps to make the world a better place” (SMVB), and “Doing my job, I can realize my full potential” (IP). The participants indicated their responses on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree.

We decided to use this measure because of three reasons. First, we conceptualize calling as multidimensional construct and thus our measure should also assess the different facets of calling. Second, we believe that regarding a person’s life satisfaction, living one’s calling is equally or even more important than knowing one’s calling. Thus, we needed a measure that captures the realization of one’s calling in the world of employment. Third, according to empirical evidence, psychometric properties of the MCM are sound, with high expected correlations with both other calling measures (e.g., the Brief Calling Scale [BCS] or the Calling and Vocation Questionnaire [CVQ] from Dik et al., 2012) and well-being and health-related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, life satisfaction, self-efficacy and burnout, see Hagmaier & Abele, 2012, 2013). Compared with other available calling instruments (e.g., BCS or CVQ), the MCM also explained more variance regarding job and life satisfaction (Hagmaier & Abele, 2013). The reliability of the original scale is good (internal consistency: α = .77–.88; test–retest reliability: r = .68–.72; Hagmaier & Abele, 2013). The internal consistencies of the three MCM subscales in the present study (α_MCM−IP = .82; α_MCM−SMVB = .72; α_MCM−TGF = .81) as well as the MCM sum score (α = .82), were good.¹

Life satisfaction

Life satisfaction was measured with the German version (Glaesmer, Grande, Braehler, & Roth, 2011) of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larson, & Griffin, 1985). This scale comprises 5 items (e.g., “In most ways, my life is close to the ideal,” and “If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing”). The participants based their answers on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The scale is widely used and correlates expectedly with other measures of subjective well-being and health (e.g., positive and negative affect, social support and depressiveness, see Diener et al., 1985; Glaesmer et al., 2011). Also, the reliability of the original scale is good (internal consistency: α = .87; test–retest reliability: r = .82; Diener et al., 1985). The internal consistency of the scale in the present study is α = .84.

Self-congruence

The participants’ self-congruence concerning their actual and ideal self was measured using the Integrated Self-Discrepancy Index (ISDI; Hardin & Lakin, 2009), which is based on Higgins’ selves questionnaire (Higgins, 1987; Higgins et al., 1985). Using the ISDI, participants first read the following short definition of the ideal self: “Your ideal self refers to your beliefs concerning the attributes you would ideally like to possess and your ultimate goals for yourself” (see Hardin & Lakin, 2009, p. 4). After having read this definition, they were asked to write down five attributes they ideally would like to possess. Following the suggestion by Hardin (2002) who showed that some people have difficulties coming up with five attributes by themselves, we provided them with a list of 80 potential attributes (Abele, Uchronski, Suitner, & Wojciszke, 2008; Hardin & Lakin, 2009). This list appeared in the background on the computer screen 60 s after they were asked to cite five attributes. In the next step, the five attributes the participants had selected appeared on the screen, and they were asked to state how much these attributes described themselves at present using a 4-point scale (1 = doesn’t apply to me at all to 4 = completely applies to me). The Cronbach’s α for the internal consistency of the original version of the ISDI was α = .81. The ISDI also correlates expectedly with dejection, agitation, cheerfulness, quiescence, social anxiety, and depressive symptoms (Hardin & Lakin, 2009). The internal consistency of the ISDI in the present study is good α = .81.

Engagement orientation

Participants’ engagement orientation was measured via 4 items of the German Orientations to Happiness Questionnaire (OTH, Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2005; Ruch et al., 2010). Sample items are “I am always very absorbed in what I do” or “I seek out situations that challenge my skills and abilities.” Participants based their answers on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = very much unlike me to 5 = very much like me. The scale correlates expectedly with life satisfaction and engaged behavior at work (Ruch et al., 2010). The reliability of the German version of the OTH is satisfactory (internal consistency: α = .63 to .64; test–retest reliability: r = .63; Ruch et al., 2010). The internal consistency of the 4 items used in the present study is α = .54.

Data Analysis

Before testing our hypotheses, we constructed a measurement model for each of the four latent variables (calling, self-congruence, engagement orientation, and life satisfaction). Regarding life satisfaction, self-congruence, and engagement orientation, the items were used to represent single observed indicators for each of the three latent variables. The life satisfaction scale, for instance, contains 5 items, and, as such, each item was used to represent one of five observed indicators of our latent construct life satisfaction. In contrast, for calling, which is a multidimensional construct, parcels were created according to the three subscales of the MCM (Hagmaier & Abele, 2012).

Afterwards, we conducted a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) using MPlus (Muthén & Muthén, 1998) to ensure the distinctness of the used variables. Using a maximum likelihood estimation method, the results of the CFA revealed that the four-factor model that distinguishes between (1) calling, (2) self-congruence, (3) engagement orientation, and (4) life satisfaction fitted the data well (χ² = 344.07, df = 221, comparative fit index [CFI] = .94, Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] = .93, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = .05, standardized root mean square residual [SRMR] = .06; cf. Hu & Bentler, 1999; Fan, Thompson, & Wang, 1999). The standardized item loadings on their respective factors ranged from .40 to .86, and they were all significant (all ps < .001). Moreover, this model provided a significant improvement in fit (all ps < .001) compared with a model in which (a) all variables were supposed to load on a single factor (χ² = 1,203.79, df = 230, CFI = .54, TLI = .49, RMSEA = .13, SRMR = .12), (b) the independent and dependent variables collapse into a single factor (χ² = 970.12, df = 229, CFI = .65, TLI = .61, RMSEA = .12, SRMR = .11), (c) the mediator variables, self-congruence and engagement orientation, form a factor (χ² = 623.37, df = 227, CFI = .81, TLI = .80, RMSEA = .09, SRMR = .08), (d) the mediator variable self-congruence and the independent variable form a factor (χ² = 852.40, df = 227, CFI = .70, TLI = .68, RMSEA = .11, SRMR = .10), (e) the mediator variable engagement orientation and the independent variable form a factor (χ² = 602.20, df = 227, CFI = .82, TLI = .80, RMSEA = .08, SRMR = .07), (f) the mediator variable self-congruence and the dependent variable form a factor (χ² = 790.63, df = 227, CFI = .73, TLI = .70, RMSEA = .10, SRMR = .08), and (g) the mediator variable engagement orientation and the dependent variable form a factor (χ² = 604.45, df = 227, CFI = .82, TLI = .80, RMSEA = .08, SRMR = .07).

Finally, we tested our hypotheses using structural equation modeling, which allowed us to investigate the direct and indirect effects of calling on life satisfaction at the same time. As recommended by Preacher and Hayes (2008), we conducted 5,000 bootstrapping samples to test the significance of indirect effects of the mediators. Applying this procedure, an indirect effect was significant if zero was not included in the computed confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, and zero-order correlations among all measured variables. The realization of one’s calling correlated significantly and positively with life satisfaction, self-congruence, and engagement orientation. Further, self-congruence and engagement orientation were positively related to life satisfaction.

Table 1.

Study 1: Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations Among all Study Variables.

Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. Gender^a	—	—
2. Education^b	—	—	.04
3. Partnership^c	—	—	−.04	.09
4. Age	36.20	10.47	−.05	−.14*	.01
5. Work hours	39.97	7.66	−.23**	.20**	−.05	−.14
6. Calling	3.08	0.90	.11	.16*	.00	.16*	.05
7. Life satisfaction	3.32	0.72	.05	.14*	.27**	.01	.04	.34**
8. Self-congruence	2.60	0.69	.04	.14*	.10	.01	.00	.27**	.36**
9. Engagement orientation	2.99	0.61	−.08	−.08	.16*	.19**	.01	.31***	.30***	.22***

Note. ^a1 = male and 2 = female; ^b1 = no university degree, and 2 = university degree; ^c1 = not living in a partnership and 2 = living in a partnership.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Test of Hypotheses

We tested our hypotheses using structural equation modeling. The final model showed good fit indices (χ² = 346.93, df = 222, CFI = .94, TLI = .93, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .06) and explained 33% of the variance concerning life satisfaction. Figure 1 shows the findings for the hypotheses. We found a significant positive relation between calling and life satisfaction (β = .45, p < .001), supporting hypothesis 1. As predicted in Hypothesis 2, the direct path between the realization of calling and self-congruence was positive and significant (β = .38, p < .001). Hypothesis 3 was also supported, there was a significant positive path between calling and engagement orientation (β = .51, p < .001). In support of Hypotheses 4 and 5, the relation between calling and life satisfaction was mediated by self-congruence (β = .11; 95% CI .026, .192) and engagement orientation (β = .14; 95% CI .003, .273). The direct path between calling and life satisfaction remained significant (β = .22, p < .001), indicating partial mediation via self-congruence and engagement orientation.

Figure 1.

Structural equation model examining the direct and indirect (see parentheses) effects of the realization of one’s calling on life satisfaction. Note. IP (calling subscale) = identification and P-E-Fit; SMVB (calling subscale) = sense and meaning and value-driven behavior; TGF (calling subscale) = transcendent guiding force. ***p < .001.

Alternative model

As the direction of influences regarding the calling–life satisfaction relation was unclear, we also tested an alternative model, which assumed that people with high life satisfaction feel high self-congruence and engage in their work and thus feel their work perfectly fits their calling. We used the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) to test whether the alternative model fitted the data better than our hypothesized one. We chose this comparison criterion as our models were nonnested. A model with lower BIC values is considered to fit the data better than a model with higher BIC values. Further, BIC differences from 0 to 2 are characterized as weak, from 2 to 6 as positive, from 6 to 10 as strong, and above 10 as very strong (see Raftery, 1995). The results revealed that the alternative model had good fit indices (χ² = 356.46, df = 222, CFI = .94, TLI = .93, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .06). However, compared with the hypothesized model (BIC = 14143.87), the fit to the data was slightly worse (BIC = 14,144.35; ΔBIC = 0.48).

Discussion

The results of this cross-sectional study revealed that the realization of one’s calling is directly and indirectly—via greater self-congruence and engagement orientation—related to life satisfaction, thereby supporting our hypotheses. This means that at least in the workplace, called people seem to have reached a place where the reality matches their ideal. However, because of the cross-sectional design of the study, we cannot draw conclusions about the longer lasting relation between calling and life satisfaction. We aimed to overcome this limitation by testing the same hypotheses using a study with 3 points of measurement.

Study 2: Longer Lasting Relation Between Calling and Life Satisfaction

The second study had three points of measurement and used a homogeneous sample of professionals, all of who worked as nurses. We choose this sample because recent research revealed that people working in the educational and health system are more likely to experience their job as their calling than people working in other occupations (e.g., in business; cf. Hagmaier & Abele, 2012). Thus, the number of nurses who feel called should be quite high. The aim of this second study was (a) to test whether the relation between the realization of one’s calling and life satisfaction is longer lasting and (b) to confirm whether self-congruence and engagement orientation are important mediators using a different sample and research design.

Method

Participants and Procedure

To test our hypotheses, we used the e-mail distribution list of the German Association of Nurses and invited 695 nurses to take part in an online survey. At Time 1, n = 457; at Time 2, n = 352; and at Time 3, N = 291 participants completed the survey. As 22 of the participants did not state a code, we were not able to match their scores to the data at the three measurement times. Further, we had to delete 14 surveys due to missing variables of interest and another 7 because the respondents were not currently working as nurses. Hence, the final sample comprised 248 professionals (190 females, 58 males; mean age = 38.75, SD = 11.38; 73.4% living with a partner). The participants reported an average workload of 36.96 hr per week (SD = 9.47). Participation was voluntary, and the participants received no payment. Upon completion of the first online survey, the participants were asked to provide their e-mail address, so that we were able to provide them with the link for the second online questionnaire 8 weeks later and the third one after another 8 weeks. As an incentive to take part in the study, we offered participants to inform them about the general results of the study and they had the chance to win one of five US$30 Amazon gift cards.

Measures

To test our hypotheses as well as the alternative model (life satisfaction → self- congruence/engagement orientation → calling), we used the same measures as in Study 1, whereby the realization of one’s calling and life satisfaction was measured both at Time 1 (T1) and Time 3 (T3) and the mediator variables at Time 2 (T2). The internal consistencies of the used measures are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Study 2: Correlations, Means, Standard Deviations, and Internal Consistencies Among all Study Variables.

Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Gender^a	—	—	—
2. Age	38.75	11.38	.07	—
3. Partnership^b	—	—	−.01	−.14*	—
4. Work hours	36.96	9.47	−.24***	−.05	.10	—
5. Calling T1	3.51	0.70	.03	−.13*	.02	.13*	.82
6. Calling T3	3.41	0.69	.01	−.17**	.05	.11	.79***	.85
7. Life satisfaction T1	3.40	0.71	.08	−.03	−.16*	.02	.24***	.24***	.80
8. Life satisfaction T3	3.42	0.63	.08	−.08	−.13*	.01	.16**	.26***	.79***	.76
9. Self-congruence T2	2.35	0.63	−.10	−.06	.03	.11	.22***	.20***	.28***	.25***	.77
10. Engagement orientation T2	3.32	0.63	−.03	.05	−.15*	.03	.26***	.33***	.30***	.23***	.32***	.50

Note. ^a1 = male and 2 = female; ^b1 = not living in a partnership and 2 = living in a partnership; Internal consistencies of the measures are presented on the diagonal.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Data Analysis

In line with the procedure in Study 1, we first constructed a measurement model and then conducted a series of CFAs to ensure the distinctness of the used variables. The results of the CFA revealed that the four-factor model that distinguishes between (1) calling T1, (2) self-congruence T2, (3) engagement orientation T2, and (4) life satisfaction T3 fitted the data well (χ² = 321.95, df = 221, CFI = .93, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .04, SRMR = .07). The standardized item loadings on their respective factors ranged from .36 to .83, and they were all significant (all ps < .001). Moreover, this model provided a significant improvement in fit (all ps < .001) compared with a model in which (a) all variables were supposed to load on a single factor (no convergence was found); (b) the independent and dependent variables collapse into a single factor (χ² = 696.44, df = 227, CFI = .67, TLI = .63, RMSEA = .09, SRMR = .10), (c) the mediator variables self-congruence and engagement orientation form a factor (χ² = 462.35, df = 227, CFI = .84, TLI = .82, RMSEA = .07, SRMR = .08), (d) the mediator variable self-congruence and the independent variable form a factor (χ² = 654.33, df = 227, CFI = .70, TLI = .68, RMSEA = .09, SRMR = .10), (e) the mediator variable engagement orientation and the independent variable form a factor (χ² = 436.97, df = 227, CFI = .83, TLI = .82, RMSEA = .07, SRMR = .08), (f) the mediator variable self-congruence and the dependent variable form a factor (χ² = 628.73, df = 227, CFI = .72, TLI = .69, RMSEA = .08, SRMR = .09), and (g) the mediator variable engagement orientation and the dependent variable form a factor (χ² = 483.87, df = 227, CFI = .82, TLI = .80, RMSEA = .07, SRMR = .08).

Then, we again tested our hypotheses using structural equation modeling including bootstrapping procedure to test the significance of indirect effects of the mediators.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations, internal consistencies, and zero-order correlations among all measured variables. The realization of one’s calling at T1 was correlated positively with life satisfaction at T3 as well as with self-congruence and engagement orientation at T2. Further, self-congruence T2, engagement orientation T2, and life satisfaction T3 were positively related.

Test of Hypotheses

The model showed good fit indices (χ² = 329.87, df = 222, CFI = .93, TLI = .91, RMSEA = .04, SRMR = .07) and explained 14% of the variance concerning life satisfaction T3. Figure 2 shows the findings for the hypotheses. In support of Hypothesis 1, we found a significant positive path between calling T1 and life satisfaction T3 (β = .20, p < .05). As predicted in Hypotheses 2 and 3, the direct paths between the realization of calling T1 and self-congruence T2 and engagement orientation T2 were positive and significant (β = .35, p < .001 and β = .52, p < .001). In support of Hypotheses 4 and 5, the relation between calling T1 and life satisfaction T3 was mediated by self-congruence T2 (β = .09; 95% CI .023, .163) and engagement orientation T2 (β = .11; 95% CI .049, .264). Further, the direct path between calling T1 and life satisfaction T3 was no longer significant (β = .02, p > .05), indicating full mediation via self-congruence T2 and engagement orientation T2.

Figure 2.

Structural equation model examining the direct and indirect (see parentheses) effects of the realization of one’s calling at T1 on life satisfaction T3. Note: IP (calling sub scale) = identification and P-E-Fit; SMVB (calling subscale) = sense and meaning and value-driven behavior; TGF (calling subscale) = transcendent guiding force. ***p < .001. *p < .05.

Alternative model

As the direction of influence regarding the calling–life satisfaction relation was unclear, we also tested an alternative model. This model assumed that people with high life satisfaction T1 feel high self-congruence T2 and follow an engagement orientation T2, which help them to recognize that their work perfectly fits their calling T3. This alternative model had good fit indices (χ² = 333.09, df = 222, CFI = .92, TLI = .91, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .07). However, compared to the hypothesized model (BIC = 15208.63), it had a significantly higher BIC value (BIC = 15211.86), indicating that the hypothesized model fits the data better than the alternative one (ΔBIC = 3.23; see Raftery, 1995).

General Discussion

The present research aimed to shed additional light on the relation between the realization of one’s calling and a person’s life satisfaction. Previous research revealed a positive relation between these factors (e.g., Duffy et al., 2011, 2012, 2013; Peterson et al., 2009; Wrzesniewski et al., 1997). We extended these findings by (a) investigating new mediators, self-congruence, and engagement orientation, underlying the calling–life satisfaction relation and (b) testing the short-term and long-term relation between calling and life satisfaction. We found that the realization of one’s calling affects not only a person’s current life satisfaction but also his or her life satisfaction measured 16 weeks later. Comparing the model fit indices of the hypothesized model (calling → self-congruence/ engagement orientation → life satisfaction) with those of the alternative model (life satisfaction → self-congruence/ engagement orientation → calling), we found that the hypothesized model fitted the data significantly better than the alternative one. Thus, calling seems to have a stronger effect on a person’s life satisfaction than the other way round. Yet, to confirm this result, longitudinal studies are needed over a longer period (e.g., months/years rather than weeks).

Further, our results revealed that people who realize their calling experience congruence between their actual self and their ideal self. Thus, called people may well state, “I am what I want to be.” Self-congruence and engagement orientation were also significant mediators in both studies. In Study 1, the effect of calling on life satisfaction was mediated partially by these variables. In contrast, it was fully mediated by self-congruence and engagement orientation in Study 2. These findings suggest that in the long term, outer congruence (the fit between a person and his or her environment) has to be accompanied by inner congruence (the fit between a person’s actual and ideal self) as well as an engagement orientation to maintain satisfaction with life.

These results have practical implications relevant to career counselors and coaches. Counselors are encouraged to help identify and foster a client’s calling because the realization of this calling will enable the person to experience outer congruence (the fit between a person and his/her environment) and have a positive influence on the person’s life satisfaction. If someone is unable to realize his or her calling, coaches might advise the person to “craft” his or her work (Berg et al., 2010) to reduce the gap between the ideal and reality, thereby increasing his or her satisfaction. Further, counselors should be aware of a person’s inner congruence to achieve longer lasting life satisfaction. To overcome the gap between knowing one’s calling and realizing one’s calling an engagement orientation to happiness might also be a key feature and starting point in counseling interventions (see also Elangovan et al., 2010).

Limitations and Future Research

The biggest limitation of the present research is that we were not able to test for longitudinal effects, as the sample size of Study 2 was too small (Cohen, 1988; Westland, 2010). In order to construct a longitudinal model whereby earlier variables predict later ones when identical earlier variables are accounted for, 12 latent variables (calling T1, T2, T3; life satisfaction T1, T2, T3, Self-congruence T1, T2, T3, and engagement orientation T1, T2, T3) need to be estimated, which requires a minimum sample size of N = 766 to detect an effect (Soper, 2014). Thus, further research is needed to replicate the present models and test for longitudinal effects. Such research might also include more mediator variables (e.g., social support and feedback at work) to fully investigate the mechanisms underlying the calling–life satisfaction relation. Second, both studies were conducted online, and only people with Internet access could take part. However, as almost 80% of the German population (and almost 100% of professionals) has Internet access (German Federal Statistical Office, 2011), we do not think that this method has biased the data. Moreover, it would be interesting to study different occupational groups to test whether and how the relation between calling and life satisfaction varies among different professions. Finally, all our data are based on self-reports. However, as all the measured constructs refer to the personal experience of a person (e.g., calling, self-congruence, life satisfaction), we believe that self-reports are adequate measures for these variables.

Conclusion

To sum up, the present research shows that the realization of one’s calling affects not only a person’s current life satisfaction but also his or her life satisfaction measured 16 weeks later. At least in the world of employment, people who have realized their calling appear to experience outer congruence, with reality coming very close to their ideals and inner congruence as well as an engagement orientation playing an important mediating role in the calling–life satisfaction relation. These findings provide important information on the relation between calling and life satisfaction and may serve as a starting point for career counselors and coaches.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Authors contributed equally to this article.

Acknowledgments

We thank Bianca Sauter and Isabell Hinkel for their help in data collection.

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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Parts of this research were supported by a Universität Bayern e.V. grant to the first author.

Note

References

Abele

A. E.

Uchronski

Suitner

Wojciszke

(2008). Towards an operationalization of the fundamental dimensions of agency and communion: Trait content ratings in five countries considering valence and frequency of word occurrence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1202–1217. doi:10.1002/ejsp.575

Berg

J. M.

Grant

A. M.

Johnson

(2010).When callings are calling: Crafting work and leisure in pursuit of unanswered occupational callings. Organization Science, 21, 973–994. doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0497

Bunderson

J. S.

Thompson

J. A.

(2009). The call of the wild: Zookeepers, calling and the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54, 32–57. doi:10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.32

Caprara

G. V.

Barbaranelli

Steca

Malone

P. S.

(2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 473–490. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.001

Carver

C. S.

Lawrence

J. W.

Scheier

M. F.

(1999). Self-discrepancies and affect: Incorporating the role of feared selves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 783–792. doi:10.1177/0146167299025007002

Cervone

(2005). Personality architecture: Within-person structures and processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 423–452. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070133

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Davidson

J. C.

Caddell

D. P.

(1994).Religion and the meaning of work. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33, 135–147. doi:10.2307/1386600

Diener

Emmons

R. A.

Larson

R. J.

Griffin

(1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

10.

Dik

B. J.

Duffy

R. D.

(2009). Calling and vocation at work: Definitions and prospects for research and practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 37, 424–450. doi:10.1177/0011000008316430

11.

Dik

B. J.

Eldridge

B. M.

Steger

M. F.

Duffy

R. D.

(2012). Development and validation of the Calling and Vocation Questionnaire (CVQ) and Brief Calling Scale (BCS). Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 243–263. doi:10.1177/1069072711434410

12.

Duffy

R. D.

Allan

B. A.

Autin

K. L.

Bott

E. M.

(2013). Calling and life satisfaction: It's not about having it, it's about living it. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60, 42–52. doi:10.1037/a0030635

13.

Duffy

R. D.

Allan

B. A.

Bott

E. M.

(2012). Calling and life satisfaction among undergraduate students: Investigating mediators and moderators. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 469–479. doi:10.1007/s10902-011-9274-6

14.

Duffy

R. D.

Manuel

Borges

N. J.

Bott

E. M.

(2011). Calling, vocational development, and well being: A longitudinal study of medical students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79, 361–366. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.023

15.

Duffy

R. D.

Sedlacek

W. E.

(2010). The salience of a career calling among college students: Exploring group differences and links to religiousness, life meaning, and life satisfaction. The Career Development Quarterly, 59, 27–41. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2010.tb00128.x

16.

Edwards

J. R.

(1991). Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. In Cooper

C. L.

Robertson

I. T.

(Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 6, 283–357.

17.

Elangovan

A. R.

Pinder

C. C.

McLean

(2010). Callings and organizational behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 428–440. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.009.

18.

Fan

Thompson

Wang

(1999). Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 56–83. doi:10.1080/10705519909540119

19.

German Federal Statistical Office. (2011). Internetnutzung in privaten Haushalten in Deutschland – Ergebnisse der Erhebung 2010 [Internet usage in private households in Germany – Results 2010]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Statistisches Bundesamt, Wirtschaft und Statistik.

20.

Glaesmer

Grande

Braehler

Roth

(2011). The German version of the satisfaction with life scale – Psychometric properties and population based norms. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 127–132. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000058

21.

Hänsel

(2009). Job ohne Berufung? Wege zur Sinnfindung im Beruf [Job without a calling? Way to more meaning in work life]. In Hänsel

Matzenauer

(Eds.), Ich arbeite, also bin ich? (pp. 17–23). Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

22.

Hagmaier

Abele

A. E.

(2012). The multidimensionality of calling: Conceptualization, measurement and a bicultural perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 39–51. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2012.04.001

23.

Hagmaier

Abele

A. E.

(2013). Multidimensionale Berufungsskala (MCM-G) [Multidimensional Calling Measure]. In Kemper

C. J.

Zenger

Brähler

(Eds.), Psychologische und sozialwissenschaftliche Kurzskalen: Standardisierte Erhebungsinstrumente für Wissenschaft und Praxis (pp. 194–196). Berlin, Germany: Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft.

24.

Hagmaier

Abele

A. E.

(2014, 6). Are called teachers better and healthier teachers? Poster session presented at the International Conference 2014 Work, Well-being, Leadership, and Performance of the Institute of Work Psychology and Sheffield University Mangement School, Sheffield.

25.

Hall

D. T.

Chandler

D. E.

(2005). Psychological success: When the career is a calling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 155–176. doi:10.1002/job.301

26.

Hardin

E. E.

(2002). Depression and social anxiety among Asian and European Americans: The roles of self-discrepancy, optimism, and pessimism (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 2056B.

27.

Hardin

E. E.

Lakin

J. L.

(2009). The integrated self-discrepancy index: A reliable and valid measure of self-discrepancies. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 245–253. doi:10.1080/00223890902794291

28.

Higgins

E. T.

(1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319

29.

Higgins

E. T.

Klein

Strauman

(1985). Self-concept discrepancy theory: A psychological model for distinguishing among different aspects of depression and anxiety. Social Cognition, 3, 51–76. doi:10.1521/soco.1985.3.1.51

30.

Hirschi

(2012). Callings and work engagement: Moderated mediation model of work meaningfulness, occupational identity, and occupational self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 479–485. doi:10.1037/a0028949

31.

Hirschi

Herrmann

(2012). Vocational identity achievement as a mediator of presence of calling and life satisfaction. Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 309–321. doi:10.1177/1069072711436158

32.

Hohr

(2009). Selbstfindung und Sinn im Beruf und in der organisation. [Self-discovery and meaning at work]. In Hänsel

Matzenauer

(Eds.), Ich arbeite, also bin ich? (pp. 24–39). Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

33.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

34.

Hunter

Dik

B. J.

Banning

J. H.

(2010). College students’ perceptions of calling in work and life: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 178–186. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.008

35.

Kennedy

R. F.

(1968, 3, 18). Robert F. Kennedy speeches. Remarks at the University of Kansas, March, 18, 1968. Retrieved from http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Research-Aids/Ready-Reference/RFK-Speeches/Remarks-of-Robert-F-Kennedy-at-the-University-of-Kansas-March-18-1968.aspx

36.

Körner

Reitzle

Silbereisen

R. K.

(2012). Work-related demands and life satisfaction: The effects of engagement and disengagement among employed and long-term unemployed people. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 187–196. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.05.004

37.

McConnell

A. R.

(2011). The multiple self-aspects framework: Self-concept representation and its implications. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 3–27. doi:10.1177/1088868310371101

38.

Michalos

A. C.

(1985). Multiple discrepancies theory (MDT). Social Indicators Research, 16, 347–413. doi:10.1007/BF00333288

39.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(1998). Mplus user's guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

40.

Ogilvie

D. M.

Clark

M. D.

(1992). The best and worst of it: Age and sex differences in self-discrepancy research. In Lipka

R. P.

Brinthaupt

T. M.

(Eds.), Self-perspectives across the life span (pp. 186–222). Albany: State University of New York Press.

41.

Peterson

Park

Seligman

M.E.P.

(2005). Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction: The full life versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 61, 25–41. doi: 10.1007/s10902-004-1278-z

42.

Peterson

Park

Hall

Seligman

M. E. P.

(2009). Zest at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 161–172. doi:10.1002/job.584

43.

Praskova

Creed

P. A.

Hood

(2014). The development and initial validation of a career calling scale for emerging adults. Journal of Career Assessment. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1177/1069072714523089

44.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

45.

Raftery

A. E.

(1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163.

46.

Reich

W. A.

Kessel

E. M.

Bernieri

F. J.

(2013). Life satisfaction and the self: Structure, content, and function. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14, 293–308. doi:10.1007/s10902-012-9332-8

47.

Ruch

Harzer

Proyer

R. T.

Park

Peterson

(2010). Ways to happiness in German-speaking countries: The adaptation of the German version of the orientations to happiness questionnaire in paper-pencil and internet samples. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 227–234. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000030.

48.

Seligman

M. E. P.

(2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York, NY: Free Press.

49.

Soper

D. S.

(2014). A-priori sample size calculator for structural equation models [Software]. Retrieved from http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc

50.

Steger

M. F.

Oishi

Kesibir

(2011). Is a life without meaning satisfying? The moderating role of the search for meaning in satisfaction with life judgments. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 173–180. doi:10.1080/17439760.2011.569171

51.

Westland

J. C.

(2010). Lower bounds on sample size in structural equation modeling. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9, 476–487. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2010.07.003

52.

Wrzesniewski

McCauley

Rozin

Schwartz

(1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People's relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21–33. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1997.2162

53.

Zhang

Dik

B. J.

Wei

Zhang

(2014). Work as a calling in China: A qualitative study of Chinese college students. Journal of Career Assessment. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1177/1069072714535029

54.

Zullig

K. J.

Ward

R. M.

Horn

(2006). The association between preceived spirituality, religiosity, and life satisfaction: the mediating role of self-rated health. Social Indicators Research, 79, 255–274. doi:10.1007/s11205-005-4127-5.