PREDICTORS OF
CAREER SUCCESS &
GENDER:
A PRELIMINARY
CONCEPT PAPER
By
Rachel Samuel
Universiti Sains Malaysia
Wk 6.1
BACKGROUND



Women make up an increasing proportion of full time
workforce and of managers around the world (Wirth, 2001);
yet they are under-represented in management in most
countries and in senior management everywhere (Davidson &
Burke, 2004).
Top management and senior management positions related to
being successful in career.
Does this mean that women have not been as successful as
men in terms of career?

Distribution of Female Employment by
Occupation, 2004 in Malaysia (%)
Legislators, senior officials & managers 5.9;
Professionals 6.7;Technicians & associate
professionals13.0;Clerical workers17.5;Service
workers, shop and market sales
workers18.4;Skilled agricultural & fishery
workers10.0;Craft and related trade
workers5.2;Plant & machine operators and
assemblers11.4; Elementary Workers12.0
DEFINITION
Career success can be divided into 2:
Extrinsic (Objective)
 Salary
 Promotion
(Judge et al, 1995)
Intrinsic (Subjective)
*
Satisfaction
*
Life success
(Gattiker & Larwood, 1988;
Boudreau et al, 2001)

career success in two distinctive ways: first, the
external, extrinsic or objective perspective. Here,
visible metrics or tangible indicators are used, for
example, salary, promotions or status. These measures
have been considered as the hallmarks of career
success across a wide range of societies (Nicholson,
2000). In addition, proximity to the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and employability are also included as
extrinsic aspects. CEO proximity reflects power,
authority and responsibility in the current organization.
Employability is an increasing indicator of success
as multiple-employer and multiple-profession
careers become more common (Boudreau et al.,
2001).

The second measure is subjective, intrinsic or internal
and this would depend on what individuals perceive the
criteria of success to be using personal definitions of
success or failure, across any dimensions that are
important to that individual (Van Maanen, 1977;
Gattiker & Larwood, 1989; Miguel, 1993). Intrinsic
success is made up of job success, interpersonal
success and hierarchical success. Job success means
the extent to which individuals perceive that their jobs
offer opportunities for achievement, satisfaction,
learning and development. Interpersonal success is the
degree to which individuals perceive they are respected
and accepted by their work colleagues. Hierarchical
success is the extent to which individuals are satisfied
with their up-to-date hierarchical advancement and
their prospects for future advancement.

Subjective career success is also measured by
career satisfaction (Burke, 2001; Ng et al, 2005)
and life satisfaction. Adding life satisfaction to
the measures of career success acknowledges the
importance of work-life and family balance
(Boudreau et al., 2001). A dual operationalization
of career success is necessary because the two do
not always overlap (Poole, Langan-Fox &
Omodei, 1993; Bozionelos, 2003).

The analysis of researches on career success since
1980 show that the objective criteria/ measure
have dominated most research (Burke &
Vinnicombe, 2005;Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Ng
et al, 2005; Eddleston et al, 2004; Ismail, Mohd
Rasdi & Abdul Wahat, 2005; Kottke & Agars,
2005). The subjective criteria, though not
commonly used, has been increasingly adopted
over the last decade (Nabi, 2001; Greenhaus,
2003; Hall, 2002; Ng et al., 2005).

The deficiency of using objective success criteria has been
recognized for a long time (Hilton & Dill, 1962). However,
many studies continue to use this measure as the sole
criteria of career success (Chenevert & Tremblay, 2002;
Judiesh & Lyness, 1999; Lyness & Thompson, 2000).
Likewise, subjective measures of career success also have
its limitation. Subjective measures should include reactions
to actual and anticipated career-related attainments across a
broader time frame than one’s immediate job satisfaction
(Greenhaus, Callanan & Godshalk, 2000) as well as wider
range of outcomes, such as a sense of identity (Law, Meijers
& Weijers, 2002), purpose (Cochran, 1990) and work-life
balance (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000). Job satisfaction
may contribute to subjective career success but it could be
distinct and not necessarily related. Hence, future research
should avoid adopting job satisfaction alone as proxy for
subjective career success (Heslin, 2005).
AN ERA OF CHANGE?

For career success to be measured using objective measures, one
has to advance hierarchically within a single organization over the
course of their career (Eby et al., 2003). However, linear, secure
and predictable careers have been replaced by dynamic, flexible
and multidirectional career paths (Baruch, 2006). Since late
1990s, career no longer follow a linear path but are boundaryless,
protean and portable in nature (Sullivan, 1999; Goffee & Jones,
2000). In a linear career path, managerial success is normally
looked at using tangible outcomes and the milestones are
compensation, promotions offered and managerial level. In a
boundaryless career, however, success is marked by career
impatience (the need to move to something better), marketability,
willingness to relocate, mentoring efficacy and exposure to
powerful networks (Arthur, Inkson & Pringle, 1999; Eby et al.,
2003).

The individual factors of success which are
discussed within the boundaryless career literature
are career competencies (knowing why, knowing
how and knowing whom), locus of career
development responsibility and the boundary
between work and personal life (which is
considered as part of intrinsic success) (Arthur &
Rousseau, 1996; Cappellen & Janssens, 2005). As
organizations begin to downsize and delayer,
hierarchical success is difficult to achieve. If
career is boundaryless, then success is related to
accomplishments, expertise and personal
achievement (Wellington, Kropf & Gerkovich,
2003).

Linked to boundaryless career is the concept of protean
career which is internally-oriented, flexible, and mobile
and may involve both horizontal and vertical growth in the
pursuit of goals defined by individual workers (Hall,
1999; Sullivan, 1995). Protean model assumes that
careers continue to develop throughout life as skills and
knowledge is continuously sought in accordance with
individual goals (MacDermid & Lee, 2001). This model
allows workers with various personal or family needs or
different definitions of success to adjust the pace of their
career development while continuing to make valuable
contributions to the organization. The increasing diversity
of the workforce will continue to increase the pressure on
organizations to create niches whereby all workers, not
just those following the traditional external career, can be
successful (MacDermid & Lee, 2001).
Role of Gender
 Research on career success and gender has long
been examined (Powell & Mainiero, 1992; Lyness
& Thompson, 2000). When objective criteria is
used to measure career success, women fall short.
Though with equal employment policies women
are given more opportunities to advance, a wide
wage gap remains between men and women.

Women however report equal levels of subjective success
to men (Kirchmeyer, 1998; Bradley, Brown & Dower,
2003). Understanding of women’s careers require the
acknowledgement that women have fundamentally
different experiences and women find themselves in
different situations when developing their career
compared to men (Mavin, 2001). Pay and position do not
appear to define how women managers and older
managers define success for themselves (Sturges, 1999).
Women were more likely than men to describe success
with reference to internal intangible criteria especially
accomplishment, achievement, and in particular personal
recognition. Women have transcended material career
success and their definition of success is broader. Career
success is just one part of the success they wish to
achieve in other parts of their lives as a whole. That is
why balance is important for women.

For men, it is essentially career success when
they talk about success (Wellington et al, 2003).
Despite poorer income progression and lower
returns from promotion, women may perceive
careers to be as successful as males. In fact, once
the effects of the career determinants were
considered simultaneously, women’s perception
of success is higher than men (Jackson, 1989).

How do women fit into these changes in the career and
working world? Women now prefer a kaleidoscope
model of career that fits their concerns for authenticity,
balance and challenge, vis-à-vis the demands of their
career in the new millennium (Mainiero & Sullivan,
2005). They prefer self-crafted careers that suit their
objectives, needs and life-criteria, where they can blend
and integrate rather than separate the work and non-work
facets of their lives. Today’s managerial and professional
women do not have a typical male-type linear career.
She is prepared to settle for a satisfying career than one
that maximises her capacity to reach the top (Mainiero &
Sullivan, 2005). Hence, research should focus on finding
the most valid predictors of job performance or success
regardless of the job (Canger, 2003).

Women’s career might not follow the same trend as men’s where
in the middle and later career years, men experience stability,
maintenance and decline. Women, on the other hand, might find
renewed sense of purpose, energy and increased vitality for work
pursuits in middle adulthood (O’Neil & Bilimoria, 2005).
Between the ages of 24 and 35 years, women experience positive
management. The trend in career is positive in this stage. In the
second stage, between the ages of 36 and 45 years, women are
between middle and upper levels of management in many
organizations. If their needs are not met at this stage, they can quit
and this will result in continued under-representation of women in
senior organizational levels. For women in management positions,
the burdens placed upon them during this stage are enormous, and
it often happens at a time in their lives when they are trying to
juggle the requirements of young families, ageing parents and
developing their own careers (Cross & Linehan, 2006). The career
trend is negative in this stage. The third stage, between ages 46
and 60, the career trend is positive again. Success for these
women is about recognition, respect and living integrated lives
(Wellington et al, 2003).

The relationship between mentoring, networking and
career success has been noted in literature on career
success (O’Reilly, 2001; Higgins and Kram, 2001).
Would these variables still be critical when determining
success in the boundaryless career? In the pursuit of
boundaryless career success within the organizational
setting, individuals still need the factors of information,
support and relationship ties. In fact, extraorganizational support which is one of the outcomes of
boundaryless career is drawn from the individual’s peer
group within the same occupational or industrial setting
(Arthur & Parker, 2002). Hence, these variables are also
related to boundaryless career success measures.

In the boundaryless career, too, some personality
factors are pertinent to strive for goals in the
individual’s lives. Self-confidence (self-efficacy)
which is important for advancing careers in
organizations could be an equally important
factor for success in the boundaryless career
(Hollenbeck & Hall, 2004; Hall, 2002). To chart
your own direction and to pursue goals which are
important to an individual, self-confidence is a
very effective tool.
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE
i)
ii)
Contest-mobility perspective
Sponsored-mobility perspective (Turner, 1960)
PREDICTORS THAT HAVE BEEN FREQUENTLY USED:




Human capital (Wayne, 1999; Kirchmeyer, 2002)
Organizational sponsorship (Dreher & Ash, 1990)
Socio-demographic predictors (gender, race,
marital status & age) (Powell & Butterfield, 2003;
Simpson et al, 2004)
Stable individual differences (Seibert et al, 2001;
Eby et al, 2003)
ISSUES TO BE LOOKED AT


Salary, promotion & career satisfaction
represent conceptually distinct aspects of
career success (Judge et al, 1995; Poole et al,
1993; Jaskolka et al, 1985)—need to isolate
key variables that predict a particular aspect of
career success.
In sponsored-mobility perspective, need to
look at person-organization fit.
Continued…


Boundaryless career—to examine the
presence of strong external networks
(Eby et al, 2003; Arthur & Rousseau,
1996)
Specific conditions where men and
women may have advantage over one
another (Ragins et al, 1998; Ng et al,
2005)