1 / 12

The Managerial Career Success Measure Development and validation

The Managerial Career Success Measure Development and validation. Nicky Dries* and Roland Pepermans Presented at the 26th International Congress of Applied Psychology in Athens, Greece on July 19th 2006. Introduction. functional level promotions salary salary progression

cian
Download Presentation

The Managerial Career Success Measure Development and validation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Managerial Career SuccessMeasureDevelopment and validation Nicky Dries* and Roland Pepermans Presented at the 26th International Congress of Applied Psychology in Athens, Greece on July 19th 2006

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

  3. Content validity issues with commonly used measures of objective career success Interpretation requires additional information « Financial 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

  4. Development of the MCSM (1) Theoretical properties 0 ≤ L ≤ 1 li = 1 → L = 0 li = lmax → L = 1 Level indicator (L)

  5. Development of the MCSM (2) Theoretical properties 1/45 ≤ Y ≤ 1 yi = ymax → Y = 1/45 yi = 1 → Y = 1 Tenure indicator (Y)

  6. Development of the MCSM (3) Theoretical properties 1/ lmax ≤ M ≤ 1 li =ls → M = 1/ lmax li = lmax^ ls = 1→ M = 1 Mobility indicator (M)

  7. Development of the MCSM (4) Theoretical properties 0 ≤ MCSM ≤ 100 li = ls = 1 → MCSM = 0 ls = 1 ^ li = lmax ^ yi = 1 → MCSM = 100 Managerial Career Success Measure (MCSM)

  8. Content validation of the MCSM factual information ≠ self-serving bias ≠ common method variance correspondence self-report – archival data? objective/external: MCSM subjective/internal: career satisfaction financial: salary & salary progression • 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!

  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 Greenhaus, Parasuraman & Wormley (1990) categorical variables!(except tenure)

  10. Construct validation of the MCSM:hypotheses & results r = .29, p< 0.01 r = .12, p< 0.05 r = .12, p< 0.05 r = .21, p< 0.01 Pearson correlations ANOVA Independent-samples t test t (1096) = 4.57, p = 0.00 F (2, 1098) = 66.49, p = 0.00 Binary logistic regression • 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) Hierarchical multiple regression H1: Convergent validity – correlational approach MCSM - functional level - salary - salary progression - career satisfaction All hypotheses accepted H2: Convergent validity – contrasted groups approach MCSM: men – women higher managerial levels – lower managerial levels H3: Discriminant validity Tenure Educational level MCSM Age Sector

  11. Discussion MCSM MCSM functional level promotions salary salary increase subjective career success (gender) « career success » tenure educational level age sector Career Satisfaction Salary performance, competencies, traits, commitment… To another sample? To another place? To another time? • 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?

  12. Any questions? nicky.dries@vub.ac.be downloads available at http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~ndries/ starting August 2006

More Related