Assessing managerial career success development and validation of a new extrinsic measure Nicky Dries* and Roland Pepermans Presented at the 26th International Congress of Applied Psychology in Athens, Greece on July 19th 2006

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 2 Introduction valid measures? Objective/External personality socio-demographics human capital motivation networking mentoring gender … career success antecedents societal/organizational norms social vision Subjective/Internal personal norms ideosyncratic vision functional level promotions salary salary progression career satisfaction

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 3 Content validity issues with commonly used measures of objective career success (a) be objective i.e. observable and measurable (b) reflect an external norm i.e. be grounded in shared social understanding (c) include all criteria relevant to the construct of objective career success MEASURECONTENT VALIDITY Functional level & Promotions (a) are observable & measurable (b) reflect an external norm (c) absolute measures > inter-organizational comparison? relative measures > speed of career advancement? positive relationship with tenure and age? Salary & Salary progression (a) are observable & measurable (b) reflect an external norm (c) gender, race, educational level, tenure, sector … > internal validity? low item response rates > usability? Interpretation requires additional information « Financial success »

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 4 Development of the MCSM (1) Level indicator (L) 0 ≤ L ≤ 1 l i = 1 → L = 0 l i = l max → L = 1 Theoretical properties

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 5 Development of the MCSM (2) Tenure indicator (Y) 1/45 ≤ Y ≤ 1 y i = y max → Y = 1/45 y i = 1 → Y = 1 Theoretical properties

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 6 Development of the MCSM (3) Mobility indicator (M) 1/ l max ≤ M ≤ 1 l i = l s → M = 1/ l max l i = l max ^ l s = 1 → M = 1 Theoretical properties

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 7 Development of the MCSM (4) Managerial Career Success Measure (MCSM) 0 ≤ MCSM ≤ 100 l i = l s = 1 → MCSM = 0 l s = 1 ^ l i = l max ^ y i = 1 → MCSM = 100 Theoretical properties

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 8 Content validation of the MCSM (a) is the MCSM an objective measure? objective information > personnel records > what about self-report? (b) does the rationale behind the MCSM reflect an external norm about what career success entails? “a maximal number of upward career moves within a minimal amount of time” ≈ fast-track careers, high-potential careers > organizational norms ≈ functional level + promotions + speed of advancement > societal norms (c) does the MCSM measure the full domain implied by its label? MCSM ≠ intended to be used on its own! factual information ≠ self-serving bias ≠ common method variance correspondence self-report – archival data? objective/external: MCSM subjective/internal: career satisfaction financial: salary & salary progression

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 9 Construct validation of the MCSM: method managerial sample (N = 1458)  59% are men, 41% are women  69% are over 36 years old  41% work in the services industry  40% are in human resources  53% have a master’s degree procedure  online surveys (3 studies)  snowball sampling INDEPENDENTSDEPENDENTSOPERATIONALIZATIONS genderobjective career successMCSM tenuresubjective career successCareer Satisfaction Scales educational levelfunctional levellili agesalarycurrent net month salary (s i ) sectorsalary progressions i – managerial net month starting salary (s s ) categorical variables!(except tenure) Greenhaus, Parasuraman & Wormley (1990)

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 10 Construct validation of the MCSM: hypotheses & results H1: Convergent validity – correlational approach MCSM - functional level - salary - salary progression - career satisfaction H2: Convergent validity – contrasted groups approach MCSM: men – women higher managerial levels – lower managerial levels H3: Discriminant validity Tenure Educational level MCSM Age Sector r =.29, p < 0.01 r =.12, p < 0.05 r =.21, p < 0.01 Pearson correlations t (1096) = 4.57, p = 0.00 F (2,, 1098) = 66.49, p = 0.00 Independent-samples t test ANOVA  gender > MCSM = zero or not zero: z (1) = 25.23, p =0.00  none > MCSM = not zero: R² =.02, F(9,711) = 1.65, ns  gender, tenure, educational level > functional level (R² =.08)  gender, tenure, educational level, age, sector > salary (R² =.13)  gender, tenure > salary progression (R² =.26)  tenure, educational level > career satisfaction (R² =.03) Binary logistic regression Hierarchical multiple regression All hypotheses accepted

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 11 Content validity Construct validity Implications for future research  Internal validity: what are the true causes of career success (disregarding confounding variables)?  External validity: can the conclusions of our study be generalized? Discussion « career success » MCSM Career Satisfaction Salary tenure educational level age sector MCSM functional level promotions salary salary increase subjective career success (gender) performance, competencies, traits, commitment… To another sample? To another place? To another time?

MCSM July 19th 2006 | pag. 12 Any questions? downloads available at starting August 2006