Skip to content Skip to institutional links

Common menu bar links

Breadcrumb Trail

Institutional links

Values and ethics

Versions

ARCHIVED - Career Development in the Federal Public Service - Building a World-Class Workforce

Warning This page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.

Chapter 3 - Career Development in the Federal Public Service: The Survey Study (Continued)

Respondents' Career Goals

In order to provide appropriate support to employee career development it is important to understand employees' goals. One study of career management practices found that where there was a match between individual and organizational career plans, employees were over three times more likely to be satisfied and over five times less likely to look for work elsewhere.⁽²³⁾ Since turnover is costly, understanding employees' career goals has financial as well as organizational benefits.

Sixty-eight percent of respondents reported that they have career goals; 51% reported high scores on a five-item scale measuring career planning. There were no significant gender, job type or promotion status differences in the proportion of respondents who reported having career goals. High scores on career planning were, however, more common amongst those who had been promoted, women, and administrative and foreign service personnel. These data suggest that many public servants have given considerable thought to what they want to achieve in their career.

To get a sense of what specific career actions respondents hoped to take, respondents were asked to indicate how likely it is that they would take advantage of 13 different opportunities if they became available to them over the next two years. As shown in Table 3.12, a majority of employees say they would likely take advantage of the following career-enhancing opportunities:

a new, challenging assignment;
advancement to a higher position;
a special work opportunity or project;
intensive training funded by their employer; and
an opportunity to help younger employees develop.

Table 3.12
Desired Opportunities
Percentage reporting they would likely take advantage of this career opportunity:	Likely	Somewhat Likely	Unlikely
Advancement to a higher position	67%	19%	14%
A parallel assignment	45%	31%	25%
The opportunity to acquire line experience	42%	30%	28%
An assignment to a less stressful work environment	24%	29%	47%
The opportunity to help younger employees develop professionally	51%	29%	21%
An unpaid leave of several months for personal reasons	15%	12%	74%
A sabbatical	20%	12%	68%
Intensive training funded by employer	56%	18%	26%
Greater opportunity to interact with senior management	44%	27%	30%
A challenging new assignment	71%	19%	11%
A special work opportunity	66%	19%	15%
A reduced work week at prorated pay and benefits	23%	15%	62%
The opportunity to move to a central agency	18%	24%	58%

Respondents were unlikely to be interested in the opportunity to move to a central agency or in reducing their work involvement through:

unpaid leave;
a sabbatical; or
a reduced work week at prorated pay.

There were significant job type differences on ten of the 13 opportunities examined (see Table 3.13). Executives were more likely than other groups to express interest in helping younger employees develop professionally and in moving to a central agency. They were less likely to be interested in a reduced work week at prorated pay. Scientists and professionals were more likely to be interested in unpaid leave and a sabbatical than the other groups. Administrative and foreign service personnel were the group most interested in advancement to a higher position, a parallel assignment, the opportunity to acquire line experience, intensive training and a special work opportunity.

Table 3.13
Desired Opportunities by Job Type
Percentage reporting they would likely take advantage of this career opportunity:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
Advancement to a higher position	60%	69%	37%
A parallel assignment	38%	48%	37%
Opportunity to acquire line experience	38%	45%	37%
Opportunity to help younger employees develop professionally	60%	52%	46%
An unpaid leave of several months for personal reasons	8%	15%	17%
A sabbatical	22%	15%	29%
Intensive training funded by employer	42%	59%	54%
A special work opportunity	53%	70%	61%
A reduced work week at prorated pay and benefits	15%	23%	23%
The opportunity to move to a central agency	21%	19%	14%

Respondents who had been promoted were more likely than those not promoted to say they would likely take advantage of the opportunity for advancement (71% versus 64%), and a parallel assignment (46% versus 41%). Those who had not been promoted were more likely than those who had been promoted to say they would likely take advantage of a sabbatical (23% versus 17% of those promoted).

There were significant gender differences on nine of the 13 opportunities. As shown in Table 3.14, in each case women were more likely than men to say they would take advantage of these opportunities. The opportunities that women were more likely to embrace included both opportunities for more intense involvement in work (e.g. a challenging assignment or special work) and opportunities to reduce work commitment (e.g. reduced work week or assignment to a less stressful environment). These results suggest there may be two groups of women in the sample: those interested in more rapid career progression and those interested (at least at this time) in more balance in their lives.

Table 3.14
Desired Opportunities by Gender
Percentage reporting they would likely take advantage of this career opportunity:	Women	Men
A parallel assignment	50%	38%
An opportunity to acquire line experience	47%	37%
Assignment to a less stressful work environment	28%	20%
An unpaid leave of several months for personal reasons	18%	12%
Intensive training funded by employer	59%	54%
A challenging new assignment	74%	67%
A special work opportunity	71%	61%
A reduced work week at prorated pay and benefits	30%	16%
An opportunity to move to a central agency	21%	15%

Respondents' Developmental Experiences

Developmental experiences are the experiences that help employees to grow in knowledge and skills, thus making them more valuable employees and expanding their career options. Respondents were asked whether they had experienced seven possible developmental opportunities. As shown in Table 3.15, the developmental opportunity respondents had experienced the most was the opportunity to make contacts outside the department. Relatively few respondents had experienced a stretch assignment. Since opportunities for challenge and growth are important to most of the employees in the sample, this is a career development initiative that would be beneficial.

Table 3.15
Developmental Experiences
Percentage experiencing:	A Great Deal	Some	Little
Opportunity to gain line experience	28%	24%	48%
Opportunity to gain staff experience	28%	24%	49%
Opportunity to make contacts outside their department	41%	26%	37%
Employer funded training	31%	33%	36%
Greater opportunity to interact with senior management	29%	26%	44%
Being given a stretch assignment	22%	13%	65%
Being given special work opportunities	28%	24%	48%

There were significant job type differences for all seven of the developmental experiences examined (see Table 3.16). Executives reported more experience of all of these opportunities with the exception of training. Administrative and foreign services personnel were more likely than the other two groups to report receiving a great deal of training.

Table 3.16
Developmental Experiences by Job Type
Percentage experiencing to a great extent:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
Opportunity to gain line experience	64%	25%	28%
Opportunity to gain staff experience	45%	28%	22%
Opportunity to make contacts outside their department	69%	36%	45%
Employer funded training	23%	34%	27%
Greater opportunity to interact with senior management	67%	26%	27%
Being given a stretch assignment	37%	24%	16%
Being given special work opportunities	37%	27%	28%

The differences in developmental experiences by promotion status are depicted in Table 3.17. Individuals who had been promoted reported having had more experience on five of the seven developmental opportunities. The most dramatic difference was in terms of stretch assignments. Those who had been promoted had experienced significantly more stretch assignments than those who had not been promoted. It is reasonable to infer that these stretch assignments may have been a contributing factor in these employees earning promotion.

Table 3.17
Developmental Experiences by Promotions
Percentage experiencing to a great extent:	Those Promoted	Those Not Promoted
Opportunity to gain line experience	31%	25%
Employer funded training	36%	27%
Greater opportunity to interact with senior management	37%	22%
Being given a stretch assignment	30%	13%
Being given special work opportunities	31%	23%

Women were more likely than men to report that they had received a great deal of training (36% women, 27% men) and stretch assignments (25% women, 20% men). Men were more likely than women to report having a great deal of opportunity to make contacts outside their department (43% men, 38% women).

Since training is a key career development initiative, the questionnaire included a more detailed examination of training. On average, employees in the sample had experienced eight days of training in the previous year. Table 3.18 shows the percentage of employees in various groups who received more than the average amount of training. The groups receiving the most training were those who had been promoted, administrative and foreign service staff and women.

Table 3.18
Training by Groups
Percentage of each group experiencing:		Above Average Training
Total Sample		29%
By Job Type	Executive	26%
	Admin & Foreign Service	35%
	Scientific & Professional	18%
By Promotion	Promoted	31%
	Not Promoted	25%
By Gender	Women	33%
	Men	25%

Mentoring is another developmental opportunity that has been found in previous research to have a major impact on career progress. A majority of respondents (59%) reported having had at least one mentor. Group differences in mentoring experience are summarized in Table 3.19. More executives, promoted employees and women had experienced mentoring relationships.

Table 3.19
Mentoring by Groups
Percentage of each group who:		Had at Least One Mentor
Total Sample		59%
By Job Type	Executive	68%
	Admin & Foreign Service	60%
	Scientific & Professional	53%
By Promotion	Promoted	63%
	Not Promoted	56%
By Gender	Women	62%
	Men	56%

Career Strategies Used by Respondents

As outlined in the introduction to this report, there are a variety of strategies which previous research has linked to career progression. The survey examined 20 such strategies in detail. The specific strategies and the percentages of all respondents who reported using each to a great extent are shown in Table 3.20. Eleven of the strategies were used by a majority of respondents. As indicated in the Table, there were significant group differences in the strategies employed.

The strategies which were employed to a greater extent by those who had been promoted were:

do quality work on things superiors pay attention to (76%);
show confidence (68%);
show that you aspire to increased responsibility (64%);
develop a style senior managers are comfortable with (63%);
work on high visibility projects (55%);
round out skills by working in a variety of areas (50%);
pursue opportunities for line experience (36%);
network with influential colleagues (29%);
change departments (16%); and
cultivate a powerful mentor (14%).

While it is possible that having been promoted, these respondents now have greater opportunity to engage in these career strategies, it is also quite plausible that their use of these strategies contributed to their gaining promotion.

As illustrated in Table 3.20, executives were more likely than other groups to engage in 19 of the 20 strategies. Women were more likely than men to employ eight of the career strategies (five of which were common to those promoted). Five strategies were more popular amongst men (only one of which was used more extensively by those promoted).

Table 3.20
Career Strategies Employed
Career strategies used to a great extent:	% of all Respondents	Groups Using The Strategy More:
		Prom	Not Prom	Wom	Men	Ex	A&FS	S&P
Exceed expectations	73%			*		*
Style managers comfortable with	60%	*				*
High visibility projects	52%	*			*	*
Powerful mentor	11%	*		*		*
Network with influential colleagues	26%	*				*
Line experience	32%	*		*		*
Breadth to round skills	46%	*		*		*
Change departments	13%	*		*		*
Show aspire to increased responsibility	58%	*		*		*
Quality work on important things	73%	*				*
Leader within peer group	60%				*	*
Effectively advocate ideas	59%					*
Show initiative	85%			*		*
Communicate career goals	40%					*
Recommend innovations	49%		*		*	*
Find ways to be unique	44%					*
Go well beyond requirements	73%			*		*
Be specialist in important area	55%				*
Prepared to relocate	25%		*		*	*
Show confidence	65%	*				*

Perceived Organizational Support for Career Development

Figure 3.8 - Responsibility for Employee Career Development The role of organizations in employee career development used to be a paternalistic one. When an individual joined an organization they expected that their employer would take care of their career. Most writers on career development now recommend that responsibility for employee career development be shared between employer and employee. A majority of the public servants in the sample (71%) shared this view. As depicted in Figure 3.8, however, only 17% of respondents believe this actually happens (i.e. that responsibility for career development is shared). Most respondents (73%) say that it is the employee who actually takes responsibility for their career development. This gap between ideal and actual is strongest amongst executives -- 77% of whom believe responsibility should be shared and only 12% of whom believe it is. Hopefully this recognition will spur executives to support valuable change in career development practices.

Respondents were also asked a series of questions about the support for career development provided by their supervisor and their department. Support provided by supervisors included things like learning about employees' Figure 3.9 - Support for Career Development career goals, informing employees about different career opportunities and providing opportunities to develop new skills. Support provided by the department included items such as encouraging employee development at all levels and linking career development programs to the department's strategic plan.

Aggregate scores for supervisory support and departmental support for the full sample are illustrated in Figure 3.9. Employees in the sample felt that more career support was provided by their immediate supervisor than by their department but overall a minority experienced high levels of support. As shown in Table 3.21, these results were consistent across all groups although executives and those promoted reported experiencing significantly more career support from both sources.

Table 3.21
Career Development Support by Groups
Percentage of each group reporting high career support:		From Supervisor	From Department
Total Sample		37%	18%
By Job	Executive	45%	24%
	Admin & Foreign Service	36%	18%
	Scientific & Professional	37%	16%
By Promotion	Promoted	43%	24%
	Not Promoted	31%	13%
By Gender	Women	39%	20%
	Men	35%	17%

Career Development Initiatives

There are a variety of initiatives that organizations can undertake to support employee career development. Previous research has linked career satisfaction to the degree to which organizations have formal career management practices and provide full information on career opportunities to all employees.⁽²⁴⁾ The survey included questions on 12 of the more common career management initiatives such as job posting systems, training, and career planning workshops. Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they were aware of such programs, whether the programs were available to them and whether they had used them if they were available to them. As Table 3.22 shows, a majority of employees were aware of all of these initiatives but availability and usage varied significantly across the 12 initiatives examined. The initiatives available to a majority of respondents were job postings, information on future career opportunities, tuition reimbursement, internal training, external training and employee orientation programs. A majority of respondents had used job postings, information on future career opportunities, internal training, external training, and career discussions with a superior.

Table 3.22
Career Development Initiatives
Percentage for each initiative:	Available	Aware	Used
Posting job opportunities	96%	98%	76%
Info on future opportunities	54%	73%	57%
Individual career counseling	43%	67%	25%
Formal coaching/mentoring	27%	68%	36%
Assessment of potential	25%	55%	42%
Career planning workshops	41%	67%	29%
Tuition reimbursement	77%	87%	45%
Internal training	83%	93%	83%
External training	75%	88%	73%
Employee orientation	51%	71%	49%
Job rotation	38%	71%	46%
Career discussion w/superior	50%	76%	68%

There were significant job type differences in awareness, availability and usage for almost all of the initiatives. As shown in Table 3.23, awareness of these initiatives was, in general, significantly higher amongst executives. Table 3.24 demonstrates that the majority of these initiatives were also more available to the executive group. The pattern of results for usage was, however, quite different (see Table 3.25). While executives were more likely to be aware of and have access to these programs, they were less likely to use them. The only exceptions to this pattern were assessments of career potential and formal career discussions with a superior which executives tended to use to a greater extent. Administrative and foreign service personnel were less likely than others to use these two career initiatives and more likely to use job postings and career planning workshops. Scientists and professionals were less likely to use information on future career opportunities.

Table 3.23
Awareness of Career Development Initiatives by Job Type
Percentage of each group reporting awareness of:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
Info on future opportunities	84%	73%	71%
Individual career counseling	87%	67%	64%
Formal coaching/mentoring	79%	66%	69%
Assessment of potential	77%	54%	54%
Career planning workshops	78%	67%	65%
Tuition reimbursement	89%	90%	81%
Internal training	99%	93%	92%
External training	98%	87%	87%
Employee orientation	89%	70%	70%
Job rotation	84%	71%	68%
Career discussion w/superior	93%	75%	77%

Table 3.24
Availability of Career Development Initiatives by Job Type
Percentage of each group reporting availability of:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
Info on future opportunities	66%	55%	51%
Individual career counseling	68%	43%	39%
Formal coaching/mentoring	41%	27%	25%
Assessment of potential	50%	24%	23%
Career planning workshops	50%	42%	39%
Tuition reimbursement	79%	82%	66%
Internal training	90%	83%	83%
External training	94%	74%	75%
Employee orientation	68%	50%	50%
Job rotation	55%	37%	35%
Career discussion w/superior	71%	47%	53%

Table 3.25
Usage of Career Development Initiatives by Job Type
Percentage of each group reporting availability of:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
Posting job opportunities	67%	78%	72%
Info on future opportunities	58%	61%	52%
Formal coaching/mentoring	19%	38%	36%
Assessment of potential	51%	39%	44%
Career planning workshops	22%	32%	24%
Tuition reimbursement	32%	45%	45%
Internal training	67%	85%	83%
Employee orientation	34%	48%	53%
Job rotation	40%	47%	46%
Career discussion w/superior	82%	62%	73%

Differences were also observed between those who had been promoted and those who had not. Although both groups were equally aware of these programs, respondents who had been promoted were more likely to report that eight of the initiatives were available to them. The differences were particularly strong for individual career counselling and formal career discussions with a superior. Those who had been promoted were more likely than those not having been promoted to report using:

the job posting system;
information on future career opportunities;
formal coaching or mentoring;
assessments of career potential; and
formal career discussions with a superior.

Figure 3.10 - Satisfaction with Career Progress Individuals who had not been promoted were more likely than others to have been involved in a career planning workshop.

Awareness and availability of information on future career opportunities and formal career discussions with a superior were higher for men than women. More men also reported that job rotation was available to them. Women were more likely to report that career planning workshops were available to them. The greatest number of gender differences appeared with respect to usage. Women reported greater usage of nine of the 12 initiatives. The three initiatives on which there were no gender differences were assessments of career potential, external training, and career discussions with a superior. Their greater use of career development initiatives may be one of the reasons why more women had earned promotions.

Satisfaction with Career

Figure 3.11 - Likelihood that Employees will Meet their Career Aspirations if they stay in the Public Service Research shows that employees who are satisfied with their career progress are less likely to leave the organization.⁽²⁵⁾ As illustrated in Figure 3.10, 49% of respondents are satisfied with their career progress to date. Respondents are, however, less positive about their future prospects. Figure 3.11 shows that only 35% feel it is likely that they will meet their career aspirations if they spend the remainder of their career within the Public Service; 30% consider it unlikely. Table 3.26 contains data on group differences in career satisfaction and respondents' ability to meet aspirations. In each group, respondents evaluated their progress to date more positively than their future prospects. The most positive groups are executives, those who have been promoted and women.

Table 3.26
Evaluation of Career Progress and Prospects
Percentage of each group:		Satisfied with Progress	Expect to Meet Aspirations
Total Sample		48%	35%
By Job Type	Executive	72%	56%
	Admin & Foreign Service	47%	32%
	Scientific & Professional	46%	36%
By Promotion	Promoted	61%	44%
	Not Promoted	37%	27%
By Gender	Women	53%	37%
	Men	44%	32%

Job Satisfaction

The inability to satisfy career goals can be a source of dissatisfaction which can spill over into attitudes about the job itself. Dissatisfied employees are less productive, are absent from work more often and are more likely to leave the organization. Thus job satisfaction is an important outcome to assess.

Table 3.27 shows the levels of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction expressed by respondents. Forty-four percent of employees in the sample are highly satisfied with their jobs. The highest levels of satisfaction are related to:

schedule of work;
the job in general; and
things done on the job.

The lowest levels of satisfaction are related to:

the ability to advance; and
pay.

Table 3.27
Job Satisfaction
Percentage of employees who are:	Satisfied	Neutral	Dissatisfied
Average of all 8 items	44%	45%	11%
The job in general	66%	21%	13%
The pay	36%	23%	42%
The number of hours worked	54%	28%	18%
The schedule of working hours	73%	20%	7%
The things done on the job	66%	24%	11%
Current workload	42%	29%	29%
The amount of job security	54%	26%	21%
Ability to advance	24%	32%	45%

Respondents who had been promoted were significantly more satisfied on average than those who had not been promoted (see Table 3.28). This result supports the contention that career progress influences job satisfaction. As shown in Table 3.29, women had higher levels of satisfaction than men. This may be due in part to the fact that more women had experienced a promotion in the past five years.

Table 3.28
Job Satisfaction by Promotions
Percentage of employees satisfied with:	Those Promoted	Those Not Promoted
Average of all 8 items	54%	35%
The job in general	72%	61%
The pay	45%	26%
The things done on the job	69%	63%
Ability to advance	36%	13%

Table 3.29
Job Satisfaction by Gender
Percentage of employees satisfied with:	Women	Men
Average of all 8 items	49%	40%
The pay	40%	31%
The number of hours worked	58%	51%
Current workload	46%	39%
Ability to advance	28%	20%

The greatest number of significant differences in satisfaction occurred in the job type analysis. Although the three groups did not differ in terms of average satisfaction scores, there were significant differences on every one of the individual items. These differences are summarized in Table 3.30. Executives were more satisfied than the other groups with their job in general, the things done on the job, their job security, their pay and their ability to advance. Executives were the group least satisfied, however, with the number of hours they worked, the schedule of their working hours and their workload. The administrative and foreign services group was significantly less satisfied than the other two groups with respect to pay and job security.

Table 3.30
Job Satisfaction by Job Type
Percentage of employees satisfied with:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
The job in general	77%	65%	65%
The pay	53%	30%	41%
The number of hours worked	32%	57%	53%
The schedule of working hours	53%	75%	73%
The things done on the job	75%	65%	65%
Current workload	34%	43%	41%
The amount of job security	69%	51%	56%
Ability to advance	39%	23%	22%

Respondents' Assessment of the Work Environment

Organizational policies and practices can contribute to a work environment that either supports or inhibits effective job performance. Work environment variables like stress, morale and loyalty are barometers of organizational health. While objective measures of work environment variables such as retention, productivity and quality can be constructed, employee perceptions about the work environment will influence their motivation and commitment and thus have important consequences for organizations. To assess employees' perceptions of the work environment, respondents were asked to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed that their department was doing a good job of managing ten different aspects of the work environment.

On average, only 12% of respondents agreed that their department was doing a good job of managing the work environment. As illustrated by Table 3.31, the most problematic areas were:

stress;
employee morale;
workload; and
employee loyalty.

The least problematic aspect of the work environment was recruiting.

Table 3.31
Assessment of the Work Environment
Percentage agreeing that their department is doing a good job of managing:	Agree	Neutral	Disagree
The work environment on average	12%	41%	47%
Recruitment of good employees	41%	32%	26%
Retention of good employees	20%	26%	54%
Employee stress	10%	28%	62%
Employee morale	10%	22%	68%
Employee loyalty	16%	28%	57%
Employee productivity	24%	37%	39%
Employee workload	14%	29%	58%
Quality of work	34%	35%	31%
Workforce diversity	28%	41%	30%
The job competition process	24%	34%	42%

Respondents who had been promoted gave more positive assessments of the work environment on average and also on six of the ten aspects of work environment (see Table 3.32). These differences were particularly dramatic on the issues of quality of work and the job competition process. Men's and women's evaluations of the work environment were very similar. The only significant difference was that more women than men felt that their department was doing a good job of managing the quality of work (37% women versus 31% men).

Table 3.32
Assessment of the Work Environment by Promotions
Percentage agreeing that their department is doing a good job of managing:	Those Promoted	Those Not Promoted
The work environment on average	15%	9%
Recruitment of good employees	45%	38%
Employee morale	13%	8%
Employee loyalty	19%	13%
Quality of work	41%	29%
Workforce diversity	33%	25%
The job competition process	30%	20%

There were significant job type differences on nine of the ten aspects of work environment studied (see Table 3.33). On average, executives were more positive than other groups (although agreement was still only 22%). Executives were more likely to agree that their department was doing a good job managing recruitment, retention, morale, loyalty, productivity, work quality and the job competition process. Administrative and foreign service personnel were less likely to believe their department did a good job of managing recruitment and workforce diversity. Scientists and professionals were the group least impressed by their departments' handling of workload and productivity.

Table 3.33
Assessment of the Work Environment by Job Type
Percentage agreeing that their department is doing a good job of managing:	Executive	Admin. and Foreign Services	Science and Prof.
The work environment on average	22%	11%	11%
Recruitment of good employees	60%	36%	45%
Retention of good employees	30%	18%	20%
Employee morale	17%	10%	9%
Employee loyalty	27%	14%	16%
Employee productivity	33%	26%	20%
Employee workload	15%	16%	9%
Quality of work	50%	32%	35%
Workforce diversity	34%	25%	35%
The job competition process	38%	23%	24%