Subjective career success: A meta-analytic review

Thomas W.H. Ng
a,
, Daniel C. Feldman
b
a
The University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Business and Economics, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong
b
The University of Georgia, Terry College of Business, Athens, GA 30602, USA
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 2 June 2014
Available online 19 June 2014
This study proposes that employees have to face a variety of obstacles over the course of their
careers, each of which can create stress for employees and, in so doing, lower their subjective
career success (SCS). Using a meta-analysis of 216 samples published over the past three decades
(N = 94,090), we found that career hurdles associated with dispositional traits (e.g., low
emotional stability), motivation(e.g., lowwork engagement), social networks (e.g. lowsupervisor
support), and organizational and job support (e.g., job insecurity) were all signicantly related to
lower SCS. Counter to expectations, background-related hurdles (e.g., being female) and skill-
related hurdles (e.g., lack of job changes and international experience) were not signicantly
related to SCS.
2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Subjective career success
Career satisfaction
Hurdles
Obstacles
Meta-analysis
While the study of objective career success has a long research history in organizational behavior, there has been increasing atten-
tion paid to subjective career success, that is, employees' perceptions and feelings about their careers (e.g., Arthur, Khapova, &
Wilderom, 2005; Aryee, Chay, & Tan, 1994; Park, 2010). Linear careers within one organization have become less common, and
employees are now more eager to pursue jobs that are personally meaningful to them (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Feldman, 1989).
Given the increasing attention being paid to subjective career success, particularly in light of recent research on boundaryless careers
(Arthur & Rousseau, 1996), we believe the construct warrants much closer examination.
The major focus of current research on subjective career success is to identify those factors that promote it (e.g., Abele & Spurk,
2009; Aryee et al., 1994). However, virtually no research has examined the factors that undermine people's subjective perceptions
of career success. Greater attention to the hurdles individuals face in experiencing subjective career success is important because
global assessments of subjective career success are inuenced not only by the goals individuals have achieved but also by the goals
they have not (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Wormley, 1990; Korman, Wittig-Berman, & Lang, 1981). In fact, prior research suggests
that negative work experiences have a greater impact on employees' global attitudes and perceptions than positive work experiences
do (Duffy, Ganster, & Pagon, 2002).
In addition, employees' career paths are seldom smooth and uneventful; individuals often have to overcome numerous obstacles
during the course of their careers (Lent, 2013; Savickas, 1997; Tsaousides &Jome, 2008). Therefore, it is important to understand how
employees experience career setbacks (Bullock-Yowell, Peterson, Reardon, Leierer, & Reed, 2011; Makikangas, Hyvonen, Leskinen,
Kinnunen, & Feldt, 2011) and their resilience in coping with them (Avery, Luthans, & Jensen, 2009). Understanding the barriers to
career success will yield a more realistic picture of how subjective feelings about career success evolve across the lifespan.
Thus, the main focus of this study is examining the factors whichimpede individuals fromhaving positive perceptions and feelings
about their own career success. Our investigation is guided by conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989), which suggests that
individuals react negatively to losses of resources and try to avoid such losses whenever possible. We argue here that career hurdles
are perceived by individuals as representing the loss of resources; in turn, those losses of resources leademployees to experience their
careers as less successful.
Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tng@business.hku.hk (T.W.H. Ng), dfeldman@terry.uga.edu (D.C. Feldman).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.06.001
0001-8791/ 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Vocational Behavior
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ j vb
1. The nature of subjective career success
1.1. Emergence of the construct
A career is the unfolding sequence of a person's work experiences over time and across multiple jobs, organizations, and occupa-
tions (Arthur, Hall, &Lawrence, 1989; Feldman, 1989). As noted above, subjective career success (SCS) refers to individuals' perceptual
evaluations of, andaffective reactions to, their careers (Greenhaus et al., 1990; Turban&Dougherty, 1994). As early as the 1950s, social
scientists observed considerable variance in howindividuals viewed their own career success (Gattiker & Larwood, 1986; Pellegrin &
Coates, 1957). Researchers report that anincreasingly large percentage of employees dene their career success in terms of subjective
indicators rather than interms of objective indicators like salary and frequency of promotions (Eith, Stummer, &Schusterschitz, 2011;
Littler, Wiesner, & Dunford, 2003; Sturges, Guest, Conway, & Davey, 2002).
1.2. Affect vs. cognition
Researchers often make a distinction between affect-based and cognition-based attitudes (See, Petty, & Fabrigar, 2008), and SCS
has been operationalized in both ways. Affect-based SCS refers to employees' feelings about, emotional reactions to, and satisfaction
with, their career success (Nicholson & De Waal-Andrews, 2005). In contrast, cognition-based SCS refers to employees' beliefs and
perceptions about their career success (e.g., individuals' perceptions of whether they are advancing as far and as fast as they would
like). Most of the studies included in the current meta-analysis measure affect-based SCS and the ndings reect that perspective.
1.3. Scope and dimensions of SCS
The construct of SCS has a broad scope (Dries, Perpermans, & Carlier, 2008; Gunz & Heslin, 2005). For instance, Gattiker and
Larwood (1986) argue that SCS is multidimensional in nature and propose that it encompasses perceptions of job success, interper-
sonal success, nancial success, hierarchical (promotion-related) success, and life success. Other research has identied additional
components of the construct (Clark & Arnold, 2008; Dyke & Murphy, 2006; Heslin, 2005; Sturges, 1999). Indeed, the facets included
in the operationalization of SCS have varied considerably fromstudy to study. To keep the current present meta-analysis manageable,
we focus here on employees' global evaluations of SCS rather than on its facets.
1.4. Self-referent vs. other-referent comparisons
Individuals use different referents for assessing SCS. In self-referent comparisons, individuals compare their current success to
their personal aspirations, their past achievements, and their future goals and expectations (e.g., Abele & Spurk, 2009; Greenhaus
et al., 1990). In other-referent comparisons, individuals assess their career success in terms of some external standard, such as the
achievements of their co-workers, supervisors, mentors, or family members (Clark & Arnold, 2008). A large majority of the studies
in the meta-analysis operationalize SCS in the self-referent form and the meta-analysis results reect that perspective.
2. Career hurdles: a conservation of resources theory perspective
As individuals compare what they have achieved relative to their career goals (Greenhaus et al., 1990), they consider not only the
goals they have reached but also the goals they are still striving toward and/or nowknowthey cannot achieve (Korman et al., 1981).
The major deindustrializationof manufacturing inthe 1970s andthe downsizing of middle management inthe 1980s and1990s ledto
the career landscape becoming less stable and less predictable than it had been previously. The deep recession of the last decade
increased the level of uncertainty employees experience in their careers, particularly in terms of obtaining (or keeping) full-time
jobs with benets and avoiding underemployment. The level of concern workers today have about their careers is high (Bullock-
Yowell et al., 2011; Carlson & Rotondo, 2001; Ito & Brotheridge, 2005; Pouyaud, Vignoli, Dosnon, & Lallemand, 2012) and many indi-
viduals have had to make unpalatable compromises or make career decisions they would have liked to avoid (Grimland, Vigoda-
Gadot, & Baruch, 2012; Seibert, Kraimer, Holtom, & Pierotti, 2013; Tsaousides & Jome, 2008). Indeed, individuals who are low on
career adaptability are especially likely to experience lower levels of SCS (Zacher, 2014).
In the present study, we identify multiple groups of career hurdles that might potentially undermine individuals' SCS. We conceptu-
alize those hurdles here as obstacles individuals face in the attainments of their career goals. While the source of these obstacles varies
some of these reside within the person (e.g., dispositional traits) and some of these reside within the environment (e.g., lowsupport
for career advancement) all have one characteristic in common; all these career hurdles reduce individuals' resources for success-
fully fullling their career goals.
Conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989; 2002) is particularly relevant for understanding the relationships between career
barriers and SCS because it addresses how individuals lose resources and how they react in the face of those losses. Individuals are
motivated to acquire resources (e.g., money, employee benets, and social status) to enhance their self-esteem and their quality of
life. Indeed, individuals are often motivated to acquire resources well beyondtheir immediate needs to buffer themselves frompoten-
tial resource losses and/or to cope effectively with resource losses when they do occur (Wright & Hobfoll, 2004). By the same token,
individuals are highly motivated to avoid situations which could lead to losses of resources, especially in cases where the initial loss of
resources could lead to expanding or worsening loss spirals (Brotheridge & Lee, 2002).
170 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Inthe context of understanding SCS, conservationof resources theory predicts that career hurdles lower SCS because they generate
hindrance stress (LePine, LePine, &Jackson, 2004). That is, career hurdles shift individuals' attention away fromobtaining additional
resources, dissipate their resources (e.g., time, energy, and positive emotions) for conquering these obstacles, and lead to fewer
job/career attainments. Supporting this theory, Halbesleben and Bowler (2007) suggest that individuals who experience burnout in
their careers possess fewer resources and, as a result, they conserve time and energy by choosing less ambitious career goals. In sum,
conservation of resources theory suggests that career hurdles create stress which simultaneously makes individuals feel worse about
their career success while also making it more difcult for individuals to achieve their career goals.
3. Career hurdles and subjective career success
3.1. Background-related hurdles
Individuals' backgrounds can create either starter advantages or disadvantages in launching careers. For instance, individuals with
low socioeconomic origins might have fewer opportunities to get into more expensive and/or higher-quality schools, which in turn
limit their placement options after they graduate (Kalmin, 1994). Being female and non-Caucasian have historically lowered the odds
of obtaining desired jobs or promotions because of discrimination and negative stereotypes (Kirchmeyer, 1998; Rosenfeld, 1980).
Being perceived as being more committed to one's personal life than to one's career can also hinder SCS (e.g., Schneer & Reitman,
2002), especially for employees who have working spouses andlarge families. Thus, we also examine being married, having an employed
spouse, having children, and having a high number of children here as well. All these factors are likely to be associated with lower SCS.
Hypothesis 1. Low socioeconomic origins (H1a), being female (H1b), being non-Caucasian (H1c), being married (H1d), having an
employed spouse (H1e), having children (H1f), and having a high number of children (H1g) are associated with lower SCS.
3.2. Trait-related hurdles
Being lowon some dispositional traits creates hurdles to experiencing SCS because individuals without those successful qualities
start their careers with some resource decits. In particular, individuals with low emotional stability, low extraversion, and low
conscientiousness might have fewer career options to consider, receive less support from others, and get fewer opportunities for
advancement into higher-paying, more challenging jobs (Boudreau, Boswell, & Judge, 2001; Seibert & Kraimer, 2001). Individuals
with low openness to experience may be constrained in the kinds of work they will consider and thereby lose opportunities to try
jobs in which they might be happier. We also expect that those with low agreeableness might view whatever jobs they have to be
less satisfying; low agreeableness might hinder individuals from developing the types of social ties which would be instrumental
in obtaining more desirable jobs.
Other dispositional traits are also likely to determine the severity of the career hurdles individuals face, thereby lowering SCS. For
instance, those with lowcore self-evaluations may set lower resource acquisition goals (Erez &Judge, 2001) andconsequently perceive
their careers as less successful. Similarly, those who have external locus of control or who are lowon proactivity are likely to experience
lower SCS. Individuals who believe that their fates are largely determined by factors outside their control and are low on proactivity
will not only be less aggressive in searching for more attractive career opportunities but also in capitalizing on the opportunities they
do nd (Lefcourt, 1976; Seibert, Crant, & Kraimer, 1999).
Hypothesis 2. Low emotional stability (H2a), low extraversion (H2b), low conscientiousness (H2c), low openness to experience
(H2d), lowagreeableness (H2e), lowcore self-evaluations (H2f), external locus of control (H2g), and lowproactivity (H1h) are asso-
ciated with lower SCS.
3.3. Motivational hurdles
Independent of employees' abilities, it is very difcult for employees to become or feel successful without investing considerable
time and energy into their jobs and careers (Hirschi, Lee, Porfeli, & Vondracek, 2013). Moreover, without internal motivation to
become successful, individuals are less likely to expend resources to achieve long-term career goals (Sturges et al., 2002; Susan &
Ensher, 2001; Verbruggen &Sels, 2008). In addition, because obstacles to SCS are inevitable over the course of a career, strong internal
motivation is critical in helping individuals persevere and stay on course when they encounter such setbacks (Luthans, Norman,
Avolio, & Avery, 2008; Peterson, Luthans, Avolio, Walumbwa, & Zhang, 2011). From a conservation of resource angle, then, internal
motivation provides individuals with the extra drive needed to acquire additional resources to achieve SCS.
First, we posit that job dissatisfaction, loworganizational commitment, and lowoccupational commitment will be inversely related to
SCS. These three attitudinal variables capture employees' negative affective evaluations of their jobs, organizations, and occupations.
Researchers observe that dissatised and non-committed workers are less likely to put forth the extra effort needed to perform their
jobs well (e.g., Rusbult, Farrell, Rogers, & Mainous, 1988); that poorer performance, in turn, prevents employees from obtaining
additional and valuable resources with which to pursue career success. Second, we examine low work centrality, low job motivation,
low job involvement, and low work engagement as additional inhibitors to obtaining valued resources. Without displaying enthusiasm
171 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
and excitement about their jobs, employees are less likely to receive sponsorshipfromsenior leaders for promotions and are less likely
to receive mentoring from supervisors and senior colleagues (Scott, Shaw, & Duffy, 2008).
Hypothesis 3. Job dissatisfaction (H3a), loworganizational commitment (H3b), lowoccupational commitment (H3c), lowwork cen-
trality (H3d), low job motivation (H3e), low job involvement (H3f), and low work engagement (H3g) are associated with lower SCS.
3.4. Skill-related hurdles
Researchers have long recognized the importance of skill and knowledge in determining individuals' upward job mobility in the
labor market (Becker, 1964); organizations are often willing to pay premium wages and offer higher-status jobs to hire and retain
such employees (Sicherman & Galor, 1990; Strober, 1990). Conversely, individuals who do not possess the requisite knowledge
and skills needed to advance in their careers are less likely to attain career success (Ceci, 1991; Howard, 1986; Singer & Bruhns, 1991;
Swenson-Lepper, 2005).
Specically, loweducationlevel is perhaps the greatest barrier to entry into many high-paying and high-status occupations (Becker,
1964). Further, there is evidence that employers are less likely to select job applicants and promotion candidates on the basis of poor
university reputation and lowgrade point average. These attributes are often seen as signals of the amount of resources individuals have
already acquired or their capacity to acquire more resources in the future (Cable & Murray, 1999; Zyphur, Bradley, Landis, & Thoresen,
2008). Similarly, low participation in training and development activities is a hurdle to SCS because lack of training and development
signals employers that individuals have not been regularly updating their skills (Biemann & Braakmann, 2013; McCauley, Ruderman,
Ohlott, & Morrow, 1994).
In addition, we examine lack of international experience, few job position changes within an organization, and few employer changes
over the career as potential skill-related hurdles. The underlying theme here is that organizations value employees who have a diver-
sity of work experience; such diversity of experience is an added resource advantage to potential employers (Brett & Stroh, 1997;
Campion, Cheraskin, & Stevens, 1994). Given today's labor market appears to value a broad-based set of job skills and knowledge,
individuals with more diverse work experience are likely to feel more valued by their current and potential employers (Lazarova &
Taylor, 2009; Sturman, Walsh, & Cheramie, 2008). In sum, we expect:
Hypothesis 4. Low education level (H4a), weak university reputation (H4b), low grade point advantage (H4c), low participation in
training and development activities (H4d), lack of international experiences (H4e), fewjob position changes (H4f), and fewemployer
changes (H4g) are associated with lower SCS.
3.5. Social network hurdles
Social capital is often viewed as important as human capital is for achieving career success (Coleman, 1990; Dellippi & Arthur,
1994). Some of this social capital is derived from relationships with others within a rm, such as supervisors and managers; other
social capital is derived from relationships with colleagues outside the rm or outside the industry (Grimland et al., 2012; Seibert,
Kraimer, & Liden, 2001). Regardless the source of these contacts, individuals with little social capital are disadvantaged in terms of
learning about new job opportunities, successfully landing those positions, and receiving greater sponsorship from senior colleagues
in the occupation (Granovetter, 1973; Marsden & Hurlbert, 1988; Wayne, Liden, Kraimer, & Graf, 1999; Zippay, 2001).
Because supervisors directly control resource allocation, poor leader-member exchange quality, low general supervisor support, and
low career-related supervisor support all undermine individuals' chances for obtaining needed resources for career advancement
(Wayne et al., 1999). Along the same lines, we expect similar patterns of results for those individuals who have strained relationships
with their peers (Chiaburu & Harrison, 2008). That is, we expect that lowsocial integration at work, lowsocial support at work, and low
social status and reputation will be negatively related to SCS, too. Previous research suggests that the availability of helpful mentors
provides employees with additional resources for achieving career success (Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004). Therefore,
we include not having mentors, lownumber of mentors, and lowlevels of (career and psychosocial) mentoring received as social net-
work hurdles as well. Last here, some social hurdles employees face emerge because individuals are not effective in undertaking
networking behavior on their own behalf and thereby fail to accrue resources they should have been able to obtain (Seibert et al.,
2001). Thus, we examine lownetworking behavior, small network size, and lowpolitical knowledge and behaviors as negative correlates of
SCS, too.
Hypothesis 5. Poor leader-member exchange quality (H5a), low general supervisor support (H5b), low supervisor career-related
support (H5c), low social integration at work (H5d), low social support at work (H5e), low social status and reputation (H5f), not
having mentors (H5g), low number of mentors (H5h), low level of mentoring received (H5i), low networking behavior (H5j),
small network size (H5k), and low political knowledge and behaviors (H5l) are associated with lower SCS.
3.6. Organizational and job hurdles
In assessing SCS, individuals also consider the organizational context in which their careers unfold and the extent to which their
jobs enable or disempower them from achieving career success (Armstrong-Stassen & Ursel, 2009; Blankenship, 1973; Miller,
172 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Table 1
Operationalizations of variables.
Variable Operationalization
Background-related hurdles
(Low) socioeconomic origins Self-reported socioeconomic status of one's family/parents.
Being female 0 = male, 1 = female.
Being non-Caucasian 0 = Caucasian, 1 = non-Caucasian.
Being married 0 = single, divorced, or widowed, 1 = married or partnered.
Having an employed spouse 0 = stay-at-home spouse, 1 = working spouse.
Having children 0 = no children, 1 = having children.
Having a high number of children Total number of children, regardless of age.
Trait-related hurdles
(Low) emotional stability The tendency to exhibit healthy emotional adjustment.
(Low) extraversion The tendency to be sociable, assertive, and active.
(Low) conscientiousness The tendency to be achievement-oriented, orderly, and dependable.
(Low) openness to experience The tendency to seek and appreciate new experiences and novel ideas.
(Low) agreeableness The tendency to be trusting, compliant, caring, and gentle.
(Low) core self-evaluation The extent to which people consistently appraise themselves in a positive light across situations.
External locus of control The extent to which individuals believe their fate is controlled by external forces.
(Low) proactivity The tendency to identify opportunities and act on them, show initiative, and persevere until
meaningful change is achieved.
Motivational hurdles
Job dissatisfaction The negative emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job.
(Low) organizational commitment Emotional attachment to, identication with, and involvement in the organization.
(Low) occupational commitment The extent to which employees are psychologically attached to their current occupations.
(Low) work centrality The psychological importance of work to the person's identity.
(Low) job motivation The degree to which an employee is motivated to perform well because of subjective rewards
obtained from accomplishing tasks successfully.
(Low) job involvement The degree to which employees dedicate time and energy to their jobs.
(Low) work engagement A mindset toward work characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption.
Skill-related hurdles
(Low) education level The highest year of schooling or degree earned.
(Weak) university reputation Self-ratings or non-self-report measures of the university's reputation.
(Low) grade point average Cumulative grades in college.
(Low) participation in training and
development activities
Self-reported degree of participation in job-related learning activities.
(Lack of) international experience Whether one has had international exposure/Length of international exposure.
(Few) job position changes within an organization Self-reported number of job position changes within an organization.
(Few) employer changes over the career Self-reported number of employer changes during the career.
Social network hurdles
(Poor) leadermember exchange quality Quality of relationship with supervisors/leaders.
(Low) general supervisor support Self-rated degree of general support received from a supervisor.
(Low) career-related supervisor support Self-rated degree of career-related support received from a supervisor.
(Low) social integration at work Self-rated quality of relationship with coworkers.
(Low) social support at work Employees' perceptions of the extent to which coworkers or peers provide desirable resources
to them.
(Low) social status and reputation Self-rated degree to which individuals have favorable social images.
Not having mentors 0 = had a mentor, 1 = no mentor.
(Low) number of mentors Self-reported number of mentors during the career.
(Low) level of career mentoring received Self-rated degree of career-related support received from a mentor.
(Low) level of psychosocial mentoring received Self-rated degree of psychosocial support received from a mentor.
(Low) level of overall mentoring received Self-rated degree of overall support received from a mentor.
(Low) networking behavior Behaviors that serve to build, maintain, and facilitate social contacts.
(Small) social network size Self-reported or researcher-coded number of contacts in the social network at work.
(Low) political knowledge and behavior Self-rated political knowledge about the workplace or behaviors strategically designed to maximize
short-term or long-term self-interests.
Organizational and job hurdles
(Low) general organizational support Self-rated degree of overall support received from the employer.
(Low) career-related organizational support Employees' perceptions of the extent to which organizations provide career-related assistance
to them.
(Lack of) promotion opportunities Perceptions of the availability of advancement opportunities.
(Low) job importance Self-rated degree to which a job is important to the organization.
(Low) job control Employees' perceptions that they have authority to make decisions on the job.
(Low) job challenge Self-rated degree to which a job is challenging and interesting.
(Low) skill utilization in the job Self-rated degree to which a job allows the individual to use his/her skills.
Role ambiguity Employees' perceptions of lack of clarity about sent roles.
Procedural unfairness Employees' perceptions of unfairness of the procedures used to allocate rewards.
Unmet expectation Employees' perceptions that organizations have failed to meet their expectations.
Job insecurity Employees' perceptions of potential loss of their current jobs.
173 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Glick, & Cardinal, 2005). Work environments are viewed as favorable for career development when individuals receive challenging
job assignments and are supported for on-the-job and off-the-job training (Ang, Slaughter, & Ng, 2002; Benson, Finegold, &
Mohrman, 2004; Cappelli & Cascio, 1991). In contrast, employees view their work environments as unfavorable when they are
deprived of new job challenges and fair treatment or are placed in situations where they experience high levels of stress or job
Table 2
Relationships of career hurdles with subjective career success.
N k r
c
SD 95% CI 90% CV
Background-related hurdles
Low socioeconomic origins 1880 8 .06 .07 .01/.11 .18/.06
Being female 25,269 69 .00 .03 .01/.01 .05/.05
Being non-Caucasian 4640 10 .03 .08 .08/.02 .16/.10
Being married 11,127 24 .04 .04 .02/.06 .03/.11
Having an employed spouse 1916 4 .01 .01 .00/.02 .11/.03
Having children 4424 13 .00 .05 .03/.03 .08/.08
Having a high number of children 4805 10 .03 .07 .01/.07 .09/.15
Trait-related hurdles
Low emotional stability 11,928 18 .34 .18 .42/.26 .64/.04
Low extraversion 11,050 13 .24 .01 .25/.23 .26/.22
Low conscientiousness 11,050 13 .16 .08 .20/.12 .29/.03
Low openness to experience 13,058 15 .17 .11 .23/.11 .35/.01
Low agreeableness 11,050 13 .15 .14 .23/.07 .38/.08
Low core self-evaluation 1770 4 .53 .10 .63/.43 .69/.37
External locus of control 1638 6 .40 .08 .46/.34 .53/.27
Low proactivity 4982 12 .29 .04 .31/.27 .36/.22
Motivational hurdles
Job dissatisfaction 15,924 41 .61 .13 .65/.57 .82/.40
Low organizational commitment 16,424 23 .52 .10 .56/.48 .68/.36
Low occupational commitment 4689 13 .56 .18 .66/.46 .86/.26
Low work centrality 9271 19 .12 .23 .22/.02 .50/.26
Low job motivation 6397 9 .18 .13 .26/.10 .39/.03
Low job involvement 1623 8 .28 .34 .52/.04 .84/.28
Low work engagement 1386 5 .57 .08 .64/.50 .70/.44
Skill-related hurdles
Low education level 26,098 60 .06 .11 .09/.03 .24/.12
Weak university reputation 3051 3 .02 .03 .05/.01 .07/.03
Low grade point average 2020 5 .02 .00 .02/.02 .02/.02
Low participation in training and development activities 7662 19 .23 .13 .29/.17 .44/.02
Lack of international experience 5096 6 .03 .05 .07/.01 .11/.05
Few job position changes within an organization 2368 3 .02 .01 .01/.03 .00/.04
Few employer changes during the career 4158 9 .03 .01 .04/.02 .05/.01
Social network hurdles
Poor leadermember exchange quality 1864 7 .33 .05 .37/.29 .41/.25
Low general supervisor support 6595 7 .58 .09 .65/.51 .73/.43
Low career-related supervisor support 10,024 6 .55 .10 .63/.47 .71/.39
Low social integration at work 3238 12 .33 .08 .38/.28 .46/.20
Low social support at work 5743 14 .17 .11 .23/.11 .35/.01
Low social status and reputation 1927 6 .30 .19 .45/.15 .61/.00
No mentor before? 1919 10 .17 .00 .17/.17 .17/.17
Low number of mentors 368 3 .10 .00 .10/.10 .10/.10
Low level of career mentoring received 3447 11 .30 .12 .37/.23 .50/.10
Low level of psychosocial mentoring received 1757 7 .27 .11 .35/.19 .45/.09
Low level of overall mentoring received 3211 13 .35 .28 .50/.20 .81/.11
Low networking behavior 5307 16 .24 .04 .26/.22 .31/.17
Small social network size 2642 4 .07 .06 .13/.01 .17/.03
Low political knowledge and behavior 808 4 .37 .00 .37/.37 .37/.37
Organizational and job hurdles
Low general organizational support 5972 16 .46 .14 .53/.39 .69/.23
Low career-related organizational support 7499 23 .45 .18 .52/.38 .75/.15
Lack of promotion opportunities 3629 12 .52 .19 .63/.41 .83/.21
Low job importance 706 3 .39 .13 .54/.24 .60/.18
Low job control 4099 8 .37 .15 .47/.27 .62/.12
Low job challenge 2559 10 .45 .06 .49/.41 .55/.35
Low skill utilization in the job 644 3 .42 .04 .47/.37 .49/.35
Role ambiguity 514 3 .45 .08 .54/.36 .58/.32
Procedural unfairness 546 4 .45 .00 .45/.45 .45/.45
Unmet expectation 453 4 .77 .11 .88/.66 .95/.59
Job insecurity 2386 4 .29 .05 .34/.24 .37/.21
Note. N = cumulative sample size; k = number of studies cumulated; r
c
= sample-size weighted corrected correlation; SD = standard deviation of r
c
; CI = condence
intervals for r
c
; CV = credibility intervals for r
c
.
174 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
insecurity (Elsass & Ralston, 1989; Sosik & Godshalk, 2000). Beyond the deprivation of instrumental benets, unfavorable organiza-
tional and job environments also signal employees that they are not valued members of the team and that they do have favorable
prospects in the rm in the future (Erdogan, Kraimer, & Liden, 2004; Turner, 1960; Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997).
We include several groups of organizational and job hurdles here. First, we include low general organizational support, low career-
related organizational support, and lack of promotion opportunities because they directly and adversely impact individuals' capacity to
acquire additional resources with whichto pursue SCS. In addition, we examine several unfavorable job characteristics that have been
foundto dampenemployees' opportunities for pursuing career growth. Inthis category, we include lowjob importance, lowjob control,
lowjob challenge, andlowskill utilization inthe job. Last here, we include several widely-examinedstressor andstrainvariables because
they deplete individuals' resources for pursuing career advancement and lower individuals' perceptions of themselves as successful in
their careers (e.g., Halbesleben&Bowler, 2007). These work stressors include role ambiguity, procedural unfairness, unmet expectations,
and job insecurity. In sum, we predict:
Hypothesis 6. Lowgeneral organizational support (H6a), lowcareer-related organizational support (H6b), lack of promotion oppor-
tunities (H6c), low job importance (H6d), low job control (H6e), low job challenge (H6f), low skill utilization in the job (H6g), role
ambiguity (H6h), procedural unfairness (H6i), unmet expectation (H6j), and job insecurity (H6k) are associated with lower SCS.
4. Method
We performed a comprehensive searchfor studies that examined SCS. We searched such databases as EBSCOHost, Emerald, Factiva,
JSTOR, Oxford Journals, Proquest, PsycINFO, ScienceDirect, Sage Full-Text Collections, and Wiley InterScience, along with unpublished stud-
ies and dissertations in databases like Digital Dissertation Consortium (Rosenthal, 1979). All the studies we identied in our search
were eld studies, thereby anchoring our ndings in real-world contexts. (We excluded studies that only examined SCS at the
group or organizational level of analysis. In addition, in cases where multiple articles were published from the same dataset, we
reported correlations from such studies only once to avoid double-counting.) We identied a total of 191 empirical articles, which
together contained 216 independent samples. There were four unpublished dissertations.
4.1. Measures of key constructs
4.1.1. SCS
All the studies we identied measured SCS via self-reports and as a continuous variable. The measures of SCS can be broadly clas-
sied into two groups. In the rst group, researchers use affect-based measures; subjects are asked to evaluate the extent to which
they are satised with their current career status or with different aspects of their career success (e.g., income or promotions). This
type of operationalization was utilized in 86% of the studies included in the meta-analysis. The average alpha coefcient across
these scales is .83.
The second group of SCS measures (14% of all studies included in our meta-analyses) are cognition-based; subjects are asked to
report their perceptions of how successful they have been in attaining different career outcomes. The average alpha coefcient of
these scales is .83.
4.1.2. Correlates of SCS
Operationalizations of all correlates of SCS are presented in Table 1. Most of the correlates are self-reported. On those variables
which are typically framed as impediments to achieving SCS (e.g., role ambiguity), no transformations of the data were made. In cases
where correlates are typically framed as positive drivers of career success (e.g., education level), the variables are reverse-scored so
that all correlates indicate career hurdles.
5. Results
We utilized Raju, Burke, Normand, and Langlois's (1991) meta-analysis techniques to examine the data in this study. Table 2
presents the corrected effect sizes for the relationships of SCS with each set of correlates. (We did not include results in these tables
when there were fewer than three studies measuring a particular correlate.)
Hypothesis 1 predicted that background-related hurdles would be associated with lower SCS. We found no support for this
hypothesis; as seen in Table 2, the effect sizes for these variables were negligible or approached zero.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that trait-related hurdles would be associated with lower SCS. This hypothesis was fully supported. As seen
in Table 2, low emotional stability (.34), low extraversion (.24), low conscientiousness (.16), low openness to experience
(.17), low agreeableness (.15), low core self-evaluation (.53), external locus of control (.40), and low proactivity (.29)
were all negatively related to SCS.
Hypothesis 3 predicted that motivational hurdles would be associated with lower SCS. As seen in Table 2, this hypothesis was fully
supported. Job dissatisfaction (.61), loworganizational commitment (.52), lowoccupational commitment (.56), lowwork cen-
trality (.12), lowjob motivation(.18), lowjob involvement (.28), and lowwork engagement (.57) were all negatively related to
SCS.
175 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Hypothesis 4 predicted that skill-related hurdles would be associated with lower SCS. With one exception (H4d), this hypothesis
was not supported. As illustrated by Table 2, the only variable that was signicantly and negatively related to SCS was low participa-
tion in training and development activities (.23). All the other correlations here were not signicant.
Hypothesis 5 predicted that social network hurdles would be associated with lower SCS. With one exception (small network size),
Hypothesis 5 was supported. As shown in Table 2, poor leadermember exchange quality (.33), low general supervisor support
(.58), low supervisor career-related support (.55), low social integration at work (.33), low social support at work (.17),
lowsocial status andreputation(.30), not having mentors (.17), lownumber of mentors (.10), lowlevel of career, psychosocial,
and overall mentoring received (.30, .27, and .35 respectively), lownetworking behavior (.24), and lowpolitical knowledge
and behaviors (.37) were all negatively related to SCS.
Hypothesis 6 predicted that organizational and job hurdles would be associated with lower SCS. Hypothesis 6 was fully supported.
As shown in Table 2, lowgeneral organizational support (.46), lowcareer-related organizational support (.45), lack of promotion
opportunities (.52), low job importance (.39), low job control (.37), low job challenge (.45), low skill utilization in the job
(.42), role ambiguity (.45), procedural unfairness (.45), unmet expectation (.77), and job insecurity (.29) were negatively
related to SCS.
6. Discussion
This study contributes to the literature on subjective career success above and beyond Ng, Eby, Sorensen, and Feldman's (2005)
meta-analysis in several ways. First, the prior review examined the factors which enhance career success. On the contrary, our
study focuses on career hurdles rather than the factors that drive career success; this approach allows us to address very different
questions thanNg et al. (2005) did. For example, while Ng et al. (2005) usedthe contest-mobility andsponsored-mobility frameworks
to investigate factors that increase career success in general, they did not provide a theoretical framework for understanding the fac-
tors that increase SCS in particular. In the present study, we use conservation of resources theory to investigate hownegative feelings
and perceptions about career development emerge. Further, although 16 of the relationships we examine here overlap with Ng
et al. (2005), we were able to test 39 more relationships which were not examined in that prior review. Moreover, 64% of the
studies included in this analysis were published between 2004 and 2013 (the last year covered in the Ng et al. (2005) meta-
analysis was 2003); as a result, close to two-thirds of the studies included in this meta-analysis were not included in the earlier
review.
More importantly, besides expanding the number andrange of factors includedin Ng et al. (2005) meta-analysis, the present study
provides an alternative theoretical perspective to their approach to understanding SCS. By grounding this meta-analysis in conserva-
tion of resources theory, we are able to conceptualize the relationships between career hurdles and SCS in terms of resource losses,
why those losses occur, and how they diminish individuals' chances for achieving career success. Below, we highlight the patterns
of results uncovered.
6.1. What are the greatest hurdles to SCS?
In the present study, the four sets of variables most consistently related to SCS were dispositional traits, motivation, social net-
works, and organizational and job support. Moreover, we found several hurdles had particularly strong effect sizes (that is, larger
than .50) on SCS. These include: low core self-evaluation (.53), job dissatisfaction (.61), low organizational commitment
(.52), low occupational commitment (.56), low work engagement (.57), low general supervisor support (.58), low career-
related supervisor support (.55), low promotion opportunities (.52), and unmet expectations (.77). These strong effect sizes
have several implications for future research on SCS.
First, researchers examining career hurdles need to pay particular attention to employees' perceptions and reactions to their
current jobs and organizations. Although SCS should theoretically be the culmination of individuals' total work experience across
multiple jobs and organizations, our ndings suggest that employees' SCS is especially inuenced by their perceptions of their current
jobs (e.g., job dissatisfaction, lowwork engagement) and organizations (e.g., organizational commitment, lack of promotional oppor-
tunities). Second, consistent with previous research on objective career success (Wayne et al., 1999), we observed that current super-
visors have an inordinate impact on employees' levels of SCS. More research is also needed on why supervisors withhold resources
from employees and how doing so undermines their SCS.
Third, it is also important to note that, of all the variables studied here, unmet expectations had the strongest relationship with SCS.
This nding corroborates our earlier assertion that employees consider not only what they have achieved but also what they have not
achievedwhen they formulate SCS (Greenhaus et al., 1990). As such, researchon psychological contracts breaches (e.g., Coyle-Shapiro
& Shore, 2007; Turnley & Feldman, 1999) might be particularly relevant in helping scholars understand the mechanisms underlying
the relationships between career hurdles and SCS.
6.2. What are the least signicant hurdles to SCS?
Among the six groups of hurdles we examined, background-related hurdles and skill-related hurdles had the weakest effects on
SCS (both in terms of the number of signicant effects and the strength of those effect sizes). There are several potential explanations
regarding the weak effect sizes of background-related hurdles. Because the occurrence of background-related hurdles precedes most
of the other hurdles we explored here, background hurdles might only inuence SCS indirectly through their negative effects on
176 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
employees' motivation, social networks, and work environments. Another possibility is that the lack of signicant effects of family
structure variables on SCS might be attributable to family-to-work enrichment processes (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). That is, family
activities can replenish individuals' resources, help allay employees' stress, extend employees' social networks, and/or provide indi-
viduals with direct help and assistance with work-related problems.
Second, we also found weak effects of skill-related hurdles on SCS. In fact, the only skill-related hurdle signicantly related to SCS
was lowparticipation in training and development activities (.23). In one way, these results are surprising because knowledge and
skill have strong direct effects on objective career success and presumably indirect effects on SCS as well (e.g., Judge, Cable, Boudreau,
& Bretz, 1995; Wayne et al., 1999).
On the other hand, most of the prior literature in this area has considered the effects of past attainment of skills on objective career
attainments. However, it is quite likely that the act of accumulating those skills is not always pleasant. The greater stress and longer
work hours associated with improving job skills might have a countervailing negative effect on SCS. That is, the act of overcoming
skill-related hurdles might also decrease SCS because it detracts individuals from reaching other career and life goals which are
more important to them. We could not address these countervailing forces in the current meta-analysis, but we encourage future
researchers to consider them in future research. Conservation of resources theory might be particularly relevant here in understand-
ing how resource gains and resource losses associated with getting additional training might cancel each other out.
6.3. Implications for management practice
From a practical standpoint, identifying the factors which lower employees' SCS can help managers design appropriate interven-
tions. The career development systems in many organizations today are targeted toward providing greater resources and opportuni-
ties to the top talent or rising stars (Hedge, Borman, & Bourne, 2006). However, beyond providing traditional training and
development activities, organizations have dedicated fewer resources to turning around the careers of less successful employees.
Indeed, this study has shown that employees encounter numerous hurdles in their careers that can potentially lower their SCS. There-
fore, increased attention to employees with low levels of SCS is important because having low SCS can create self-perpetuating and
self-defeating cycles for such individuals. Supporting this perspective, Abele and Spurk (2009) posited that a high level of SCS
would increase an individual's general condence, job motivation, and goal-striving all of which, in turn, would positively affect
his or her productivity in the future. In an empirical test of their hypothesis, Abele and Spurk (2009) found that individuals' subjective
feelings about their career success did, in fact, fuel their subsequent efforts to achieve in the future.
Inhelping employees withlowlevels of SCS, perhaps the most important step here is discovering what employees want fromtheir
careers (Heslin, 2005). In many cases, the resources rms offer employees to build their careers (such as tuition reimbursement) are
unsuccessful in building SCS because they do not address the needs of many employees or are distributed in ways that disappoint
employees. Supporting this observation is our nding that unmet expectations were negatively related to SCS at .77. Consequently,
identifying the areas where employees have the highest expectation and areas where they feel the psychological contracts have been
breached could be especially critical in turning around the career trajectories of individuals with low levels of SCS. Without such tai-
lored career development plans and targeted interventions, individuals with low levels of SCS will face increasingly numerous and
powerful career hurdles and will have fewer and fewer resources with which to overcome them.
7. Conclusion
Career development has become one of the most important human resource management activities in organizations today
(Maurer, Pierce, & Lynn, 2002). As different kinds of career paths continue to emerge, individuals' career self-management and its
impact on SCS are becoming increasingly prominent concerns for organizations and employees alike. We hope future researchers
will consider not only the factors which promote SCS, but also the obstacles that undermine it. To that end, conservation of resource
theory provides a solid foundation.
References
Abele, A. E., &Spurk, D. (2009). Howdo objective and subjective career success interrelate over time? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 803824.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E., & Lima, L. (2004). Career benets associated with mentoring for proteges: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89,
127136.
Ang, S., Slaughter, S., & Ng, K. Y. (2002). Human capital and institutional determinants of information technology compensation: Modeling multilevel and cross-level
interactions. Management Science, 48, 14271445.
Armstrong-Stassen, M., & Ursel, N. D. (2009). Perceived organizational support, career satisfaction, and the retention of older workers. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 82, 201220.
Arthur, M. B., Hall, D. T., & Lawrence, B. S. (Eds.). (1989). Handbook of career theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Arthur, M. B., Khapova, S. N., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2005). Career success in a boundaryless career world. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 177202.
Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundaryless career as a new employment principle. In M. B. Arthur, & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career
(pp. 320). New York: Oxford University Press.
Aryee, S., Chay, Y. W., &Tan, H. H. (1994). Anexamination of the antecedents of subjective career success among a managerial sample inSingapore. Human Relations, 47,
487509.
Avery, J. B., Luthans, F., & Jensen, S. M. (2009). Psychological capital: A positive resource for combating employee stress and turnover. Human Resource Management, 48,
677693.
Becker, G. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. New York: Columbia University Press.
Benson, G. S., Finegold, D., & Mohrman, S. (2004). You paid for the skills, now keep them: Tuition reimbursement and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management
Journal, 47, 315331.
177 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Biemann, T., & Braakmann, N. (2013). The impact of international experience on objective and subjective career success in early careers. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 24, 34383456.
Blankenship, R. L. (1973). Organizational careers: An interactionist perspective. Sociological Quarterly, 14, 8898.
Boudreau, J. W., Boswell, W. R., &Judge, T. A. (2001). Effects of personality on executive career success inthe UnitedStates and Europe. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58,
5381.
Brett, J. M., & Stroh, L. K. (1997). Jumping ship: Who benets from an external labor market career strategy? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 331341.
Brotheridge, C. M., & Lee, R. T. (2002). Testing a conservation of resources model of the dynamics of emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 5767.
Bullock-Yowell, E., Peterson, G. W., Reardon, R. C., Leierer, S. J., & Reed, C. A. (2011). Relationships among career and life stress, negative career thoughts, and career
decision state: A cognitive information processing perspective. Career Development Quarterly, 59, 302314.
Cable, D. M., & Murray, B. (1999). Tournaments versus sponsored mobility as determinants of job search success. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 439449.
Campion, M. A., Cheraskin, L., & Stevens, M. J. (1994). Career-related antecedents and outcomes of job rotation. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 15181542.
Cappelli, P., &Cascio, W. (1991). Why some jobs command wage premiums: Atest of career tournament and internal labor market hypotheses. Academy of Management
Journal, 34, 848868.
Carlson, D. S., & Rotondo, D. M. (2001). Differences in promotion stress across career stage and orientation. Human Resource Management, 40, 99110.
Ceci, S. J. (1991). Howmuch does schooling inuence general intelligence and its cognitive components? A reassessment of the evidence. Developmental Psychology, 27,
703722.
Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analyses of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 10821103.
Clark, M., & Arnold, J. (2008). The nature, prevalence and correlates of generativity among men in middle career. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 473484.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., & Shore, L. M. (2007). The employeeorganization relationship: Where do we go from here? Human Resource Management Review, 17, 166179.
Dellippi, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A competency-based perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 307324.
Dries, N., Perpermans, R., & Carlier, O. (2008). Career success: Constructing a multidimensional model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 254267.
Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331351.
Dyke, L. S., & Murphy, S. A. (2006). How we dene success: A qualitative study of what matters most to women and men. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 55, 357372.
Eith, T. K., Stummer, H., & Schusterschitz, C. (2011). Career success perception and work-related behavior of employees in geriatric care A pilot study in a German
geriatric care facility. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 25, 4552.
Elsass, P. M., & Ralston, D. A. (1989). Individual responses to the stress of career plateauing. Journal of Management, 15, 3547.
Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2004). Work value congruence and intrinsic career success: The compensatory roles of leadermember exchange and
perceived organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 57, 305332.
Erez, A., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Relationships of core self-evaluations to goal setting, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 12701279.
Feldman, D. C. (1989). Careers in organizations: Recent trends and future directions. Journal of Management, 15, 135156.
Gattiker, U. E., & Larwood, L. (1986). Subjective career success: A study of managers and support personnel. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1, 7894.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 13601380.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S. J., &Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race onorganizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy
of Management Journal, 33, 6486.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of workfamily enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 7292.
Grimland, S., Vigoda-Gadot, E., &Baruch, Y. (2012). Career attitudes and success of managers: The impact of chance event, protean, and traditional careers. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, 10741094.
Gunz, H. P., & Heslin, P. A. (2005). Reconceptualizing career success. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 105111.
Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Bowler, W. M. (2007). Emotional exhaustion and job performance: The mediating role of motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 93106.
Hedge, J. W., Borman, W. C., &Bourne, M. J. (2006). Designing a systemfor career development and advancement inthe U.S. Navy. Human Resource Management Review,
16, 340355.
Heslin, P. A. (2005). Conceptualizing and evaluating career success. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 113136.
Hirschi, A., Lee, B., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2013). Proactive motivation and engagement in career behaviors: Investigating direct, mediated, and moderated
effects. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83, 3140.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513524.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6, 307324.
Howard, A. (1986). College experiences and managerial performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 530552.
Ito, J. K., & Brotheridge, C. M. (2005). Does supporting employees' career adaptability lead to commitment, turnover, or both? Human Resource Management, 44, 519.
Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. W., &Bretz, R. D. (1995). Anempirical investigation of the predictors of executive career success. Personnel Psychology, 48, 485519.
Kalmin, M. (1994). Mother's occupational status and children's schooling. American Sociological Review, 59, 257275.
Kirchmeyer, C. (1998). Determinants of managerial career success: Evidence and explanation of male/female differences. Journal of Management, 24, 673692.
Korman, A. K., Wittig-Berman, U., & Lang, D. (1981). Career success and personal failure: Alienation in professionals and managers. Academy of Management Journal, 24,
342360.
Lazarova, M., & Taylor, S. (2009). Boundaryless careers, social capital, and knowledge management: Implications for organizational performance. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 30, 119139.
Lefcourt, H. M. (1976). Locus of control: Current trends in theory and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lent, R. W. (2013). Career-life preparedness: Revisiting career planning and adjustment in the new workplace. Career Development Quarterly, 61, 214.
LePine, J. A., LePine, M. A., &Jackson, C. L. (2004). Challenge and hindrance stress: Relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 89, 883891.
Littler, C. R., Wiesner, R., & Dunford, R. (2003). The dynamics of delayering: Changing management structures in three countries. Journal of Management Studies, 40,
225256.
Luthans, F., Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J., & Avery, J. B. (2008). The mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive organizational climate-employee performance
relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 219238.
Makikangas, A., Hyvonen, K., Leskinen, E., Kinnunen, U., & Feldt, T. (2011). A person-centered approach to investigate the development trajectories of job-related
affective well-being: A 10 year follow-up study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 327346.
Marsden, P. W., & Hurlbert, J. S. (1988). Social resources and mobility outcomes: A replication and extension. Social Forces, 66, 10381059.
Maurer, T. J., Pierce, H. R., & Lynn, S. (2002). Perceived beneciary of employee development activity: A three-dimensional social exchange model. Academy of
Management Review, 27, 432444.
McCauley, C. D., Ruderman, M. R., Ohlott, P. J., & Morrow, J. E. (1994). Assessing the developmental components of managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79,
544560.
Miller, C. C., Glick, W. H., & Cardinal, L. B. (2005). The allocation of prestigious positions in organizational science: Accumulative advantage, sponsored mobility, and
contest mobility. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 489516.
Ng, T. W. H., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58, 367408.
Nicholson, N., & De Waal-Andrews, W. (2005). Playing to win: Biological imperatives, self-regulation, and trade-offs in the game of career success. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 26, 137154.
Park, Y. (2010). The predictors of subjective career success: Anempirical study of employee development ina Korean nancial company. International Journal of Training
and Development, 14, 115.
Pellegrin, R. F., & Coates, C. H. (1957). Executives and supervisors: Contrasting denitions of career success. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 506517.
178 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179
Peterson, S. J., Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Zhang, Z. (2011). Psychological capital and employee performance: A latent growth modeling approach.
Personnel Psychology, 64, 427450.
Pouyaud, J., Vignoli, E., Dosnon, O., &Lallemand, N. (2012). Career adaptabilities scale-France form: Psychometric properties and relationships to anxietyand motivation.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 692697.
Raju, N. S., Burke, M. J., Normand, J., & Langlois, G. M. (1991). A new meta-analytic approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 432446.
Rosenfeld, R. A. (1980). Race and sex differences in career dynamics. American Sociological Review, 45, 583609.
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The le drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638641.
Rusbult, C. E., Farrell, D., Rogers, G., & Mainous, A. G. (1988). Impact of exchange variables on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect: An integrative model of responses to
declining job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 599627.
Savickas, M. L. (1997). Career adaptability: An integrative construct for life-span life-space theory. Career Development Quarterly, 45, 247259.
Schneer, J., & Reitman, F. (2002). Managerial life without a wife: Family structure and managerial career success. Journal of Business Ethics, 37, 2538.
Scott, K. L., Shaw, J. D., & Duffy, M. K. (2008). Merit pay raises and organization-based self-esteem. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 967980.
See, Y. H. M., Petty, R. E., & Fabrigar, L. R. (2008). Affective and cognitive meta-bases of attitudes: Unique effects on information interest and persuasion. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 938955.
Seibert, S. E., Crant, J. M., & Kraimer, M. L. (1999). Proactive personality and career success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 416427.
Seibert, S. E., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). The ve-factor model of personality and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 121.
Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., Holtom, B. C., &Pierotti, A. J. (2013). Even the best laidplans sometimes goaskew: Career self-management processes, career shocks, andthe
decision to pursue graduate education. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 169182.
Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 219237.
Sicherman, N., & Galor, O. (1990). A theory of career mobility. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 169192.
Singer, M. S., & Bruhns, C. (1991). Relative effect of applicant work experience and academic qualication on selection interviewdecisions: A study of between-sample
generalizability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 550559.
Sosik, J. J., & Godshalk, V. M. (2000). Leadership styles, mentoring functions received, and job-related stress: A conceptual model and preliminary study. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 21, 365390.
Strober, M. H. (1990). Human capital theory: Implications for HR managers. Industrial Relations, 29, 214239.
Sturges, J. (1999). What it means to succeed: Personal conceptions of career success held by male and female managers at different ages. British Journal of Management,
10, 239252.
Sturges, J., Guest, D., Conway, N., & Davey, K. M. (2002). A longitudinal study of the relationship between career management and organizational commitment among
graduates in the rst ten years at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 731748.
Sturman, M. C., Walsh, K., & Cheramie, R. A. (2008). The value of human capital specicity versus transferability. Journal of Management, 34, 290316.
Susan, M., &Ensher, E. (2001). The role of mentoring support and self-management strategies on reported career outcomes. Journal of Career Development, 27, 229246.
Swenson-Lepper, T. (2005). Ethical sensitivity for organizational communication issues: Examining individual and organizational differences. Journal of Business Ethics,
59, 205231.
Tsaousides, T., & Jome, L. (2008). Perceived career compromise, affect, and work-related satisfaction in college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 185194.
Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1994). Role of protg personality in receipt of mentoring and career success. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 688702.
Turner, R. J. (1960). Sponsored and contest mobility and the school system. American Sociological Review, 25, 855867.
Turnley, W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (1999). The impact of psychological contract violations on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect behaviors. Human Relations, 52, 895922.
Verbruggen, M., & Sels, L. (2008). Can career self-directedness be improved through counselling? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 318327.
Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., Kraimer, M. L., & Graf, I. K. (1999). The role of human capital, motivation, and supervisor sponsorship in predicting career success. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 20, 577595.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., &Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leadermember exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management
Journal, 40, 82111.
Wright, T. A., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2004). Commitment, psychological well-being and job performance: An examination of conservation of resources (COR) theory and job
burnout. Journal of Business and Management, 9, 389406.
Zacher, H. (2014). Career adaptability predicts subjective career success above and beyond personality traits and core self-evaluations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84,
2130.
Zippay, A. (2001). The role of social capital in reclaiming human capital: Longitudinal study of occupational mobility among displaced steelworkers. Journal of Sociology
and Social Welfare, 28, 99119.
Zyphur, M. J., Bradley, J. C., Landis, R. S., & Thoresen, C. J. (2008). The effects of cognitive ability and conscientiousness on performance over time: A censored latent
growth model. Human Performance, 21, 127.
179 T.W.H. Ng, D.C. Feldman / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 169179