As organizations are part of the context in which career development occurs, career management is a major responsibility for organizations (De Vos et. al., 2009).
Different practices in order to implement organizational career management (OCM) exist, including mentoring schemes, career workshops, and succession planning (Inkson et. al., 2015). However, nowadays, careers are more unpredictable and varied than ever (Arnold, 2002). According to Fledman and Ng (2007) and Gunz and colleagues (2007) careers and organizations are now boundaryless (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996) and characterized by the rise of protean careers (Hall, 1976, 2002; Hall & Doiron, 2018) and career self-management (CSM) practices (Inkson et. al., 2015). Yet, paradoxically, those who lack relevant skills and resources may feel restricted (Arnold, 2002) and perhaps “unsuccessful” (Inkson et. al, 2015). Thus, the role and focus of organizations in the management of careers is that of “design and implementation of organizational processes which enables the careers of individuals to be planned and managed in a way that optimizes both the needs of the organization and the preferences and capabilities of individuals” (Mayo, 1991, p. 75) in accordance with the company goals (Gold et. al., 2013).
The careers management literature presents widespread evidence of the conceptualisation of individuals as “resources” within organizations (Inkson et. al., 2015). This conceptualisation is rooted in the resource-based theory of company strategy (RBV, Barney, 1991; Barney & Clark, 2007) which entails that employees’ careers can and should be to some extent managed by organizations (Boxall & Purcell, 2003). According to this view, employees are seen as human resources (HR) by the organization, as in human resource management (HRM), to be used combined with other resources and strategic practices (Gold et. al., 2013) in order to achieve business goals (Barney et. al., 2011) and competitive advantage (Inkson et. al., 2015). Hence, HRM policies and practices can influence an organisation’s effectiveness remarkably (Collins & Clark, 2003; Birdi et. al., 2008).
Despite employees not being businesses’ only resource (Inkson et. al., 2015), organizations naturally seek to increase competitive advantage, thus when employing organizations hire the “right” candidates, as a consequence, they increase their human capital resources (Robbins & Judge, 2019). Accordingly, this is an advantage for the organization and for the same “economic” reasons, organizations seek to retain such resources (including top talents) by ensuring employees’ motivation through future development opportunities and rewards, as the consequences associated with having a high turnover of staff do not allow proper succession planning (Inkson et. al, 2015). The Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964), another resource-based view of the organization, focuses on human capital as the basis of career management (Ployhart et. al., 2011), with human capital intended as the economic value of an employee skills set and currency of career management (Campbell et. al., 2012; Wright & McMahan, 2011; Ployhart et. al., 2011). The theory suggests that individuals should invest and develop their own human capital through either education and/or learning experiences if they wish to enhance career fulfilment (Ployhart et. al., 2011). This is believed to be likely to determine, for example, the level at which an individual starts within a new company, which in turn influences remuneration levels and/or future opportunities for development (Ng et. al., 2005). For this reason, recruitment and selection (and retention) are considered to be crucial HR functions (Robbins & Judge, 2019; Gold et. al., 2013).
In the same way individuals are human “resources” to organizations, organizations provide individuals with career resources (Inkson et. al., 2015). An employer could be a fundamental resource to an individuals’ career by helping contribute to career success and/or by developing employability skills that can be transferred for the benefit of another company (Inkson et. al., 2015). Through this lens of interdependence, an employees’ career could be a potential resource for both the individual itself and the organization (Inkson et. al., 2015). In fact, according to Inkson and colleagues (2015) both individual and organization should constantly invest in career development. Nonetheless, organizations have often shown a strong interest in developing employees’ careers for their benefit only (Inkson et. al., 2015). Besides, the resource view of careers is considered to be developed mainly by organizations with the ultimate aim to make a profit (Inkson et. al., 2015) and it has been noted that two decades after its 1991 first issue, the RBT appears to have reached maturity as a theory (Barney et. al., 2011).
As mentioned above, the rise of CSM practices in the last century has generated a new stream of research (Inkson et. al., 2012). Providing support for Blaus’ (1964) social exchange theory Rousseaus’ (1996) psychological contract, De Vos and colleagues’ (2009) study of relationship between CSM and OCM and the impact on employee outcomes found that, for example, individuals who are likely to take more initiatives expect an organizational contribution in return because they perceive their CSM practices as their part of the employment agreement. These findings imply that providing career support to its employees remains an important part of organizations’ human resource policies (De Vos et. al., 2009). In addition, the authors found that career management initiatives taken by the individual and the organization are both important in explaining employee commitment to the organization. With reference to career success, De Vos and colleagues (2009) findings illustrate that subjective career success is mostly affected by individuals’ CSM initiatives rather than by the career management practices provided by the organization (Arthur et al., 1999; Arthur & Rousseau, 1996).
Another important role organizations play in the management of careers is the influence that a high-quality leader-member relationship/exchange (LMX, Bauer & Green, 1996) can exert as it can lead to better career outcomes, stronger professional development (Raghuaran, 2017) and increased feelings of energy in employees (Atwater & Carmeli, 2009), as well as being positively related to less employee turnover, higher performance evaluations (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Walumbwa et. al., 2011), greater follower participation and more influence on follower-outcomes (Yukl et. al., 2009). Effective leadership relationships nowadays are not easy to achieve as more and more followers are challenging their leaders (Kellerman, 2007) but if achieved they translate into success and positive financial business outcomes and thus represent a huge benefit for any organization (Van Breukelen et. al., 2012).
LMX theory describes the process through which leaders attain differential levels of power with followers (and in 2007, Kellerman explored why LMX differentiation might occur and identified different types of followers: isolates, bystanders, participants, activists, diehards) and also, prescribes ways in which high-quality LMX relationships may be developed. Additionally, the theory suggests that high-quality relationships are often characterized by mutuality (trust, respect, loyalty, liking) (Green & Uhl-Bien, 1995), an aspect implied in the psychological contract (Rousseau, 1989).
Taken together, OCM is considered to be widely used to meet the organizational’ workforce needs, providing career development and support, and is considered to be most effective when facilitating CSM practices simultaneously, as, drawing on personal agency theory (Seeck & Parzefall, 2008), individuals are expected to manage their careers also (Inkson et. al., 2015). In conclusion, drawing on Akkermans and colleagues’ (2020) paper, it is evident that in order to understand such practices on the current context, the relationship between agency and contextual factors must be understood.
2021-3-26-1616750650