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

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•  

This page has been archived.

Chapter 4 - Career Development in Best Practice Organizations (Continued)

Lessons Learned and Critical Success Factors

Reading the above cases the reader is struck by the fact that while every organization has its own career development processes there is an amazing degree of similarity in what is being done and how it is being done. The following conclusions can be drawn from the cases presented in this chapter.

Top Management Commitment and Support is Key

There is almost uniform consensus that perhaps the most important factor contributing to the success of any career management and career development system is top management commitment and support. "It is the absolute No.1 factor." Without the driving force from the very top, the best processes and tools will not work or provide the benefits they are capable of delivering. The cases indicate that most senior executives set the tone for the culture. They use various processes and mechanisms to cascade the commitment and the significance that is to be attached to developing people for organizational success and personal growth down to every level of management. As was noted by one respondent: "If top management espouses it, it filters down." For example, when Alcan launched its Succession Management and Leadership Development process around the globe, the CEO visibly endorsed it. At Royal Bank, John Cleghorn, Chairman and CEO, demonstrates his commitment to people and leadership development by spending time in courses offered for high potential managers and executives.

The cases also indicate that senior executives and leaders are "champions" for career development in best practice organizations. As one respondent noted:

"Capability is entrenched in our people managers at senior levels and it becomes part of our modelling behaviour... throughout the organization."

Best Practice Organizations Invest in Career Development

Best practice organizations are also willing to invest in the career development process: to back up their vision of a career resilient workforce that is committed to the organization's success with actual commitment in financial, human and technical resources. IBM, for example, was willing to invest $1 million to get the Career Vitality Centre up and running. Financial support from Health Canada's senior management was identified as a primary reason for it being considered a successful continuous learning organization. Best practice organizations have developed and are continually developing tools to help employees as well as managers to be better career planners and people developers.

The commitment is relative to what the organization can afford. Not every organization is big enough or has enough slack to afford generous investments. But every organization can back up its commitment according to its means. Investments of money, time and technology communicate the importance of career development to the employees and reinforce the idea the employees are valued resources. The following quote typifies this attitude:

"Our chairman, our president, and our senior corporate management committee see the value in human capital. And having seen the capital, creates the opportunity for the corporate human resources function to come forward with some best-in-class practices. I would be shocked if an HR function could be considered best-in-class in a number of things if they didn't have a corporate executive committee that thinks that human capital is pretty important."

In Best Practice Organizations Career Development is Aligned With Personal Goals As Well As Corporate Objectives

There is consensus among the organizations who participated in this study that career development must be aligned with personal goals and corporate objectives. These organizations consider it to be of utmost importance to link career goals with business strategies, directions and needs. In other words, people development must be aligned with business performance for both parties to win.

Best Practice Organizations Have A Culture Which Values, Supports and Rewards Learning

Successful career development systems thrive within a culture that supports and rewards learning and participation. Statistics Canada and Hewlett-Packard are excellent examples of organizations which have developed and nurtured a culture which facilitates, supports and rewards career development. It is reassuring to note that cultural change, while often slow and painful, is possible.

The cases suggest that top management's vision and support is critical to cultural change. The cases also suggest that having top management support is sometimes all that is needed to move an entire organization into a state or culture that is more in tune to the realities of today's workforce.

Best practice companies also recognize the importance of having a supportive manager to sustained cultural change:

"You should never send a changed person back to an unchanged environment. If the manager's not involved, the environment may not change and you get no benefit from your career development activities."

In Best Practice Organizations Responsibility for Career Development Is Shared

In all the best practice companies examined, responsibility for career development rests with three parties: the individual, the manager, and the organization. As one participant noted:

"The primary onus is on the individual. The individual needs to take responsibility for his or her own career and career development. The manager needs to be supportive and needs to provide coaching in terms of identifying the right gap...and then how it may be closed. The organization should be responsible for ....creating an environment where learning and continuous learning is valued. From a financial sense, providing support is warranted, and from an organizational sense as well, making sure that there is sufficient flexibility in the system that people have time for it...and providing the tools and incentive to do it."

Without question, the traditional, more paternalistic view of career development (i.e. that organizations will manage employees' career for them, that people join an organization for life and the organization will take care of them) is no longer valid. In every organization examined, the message is clear: career development is employee owned, manager facilitated, and organization supported.

In Best Practice Companies There is Accountability for Career Development

All best practice companies have accountability built in to their career development processes (i.e. accountability is highlighted and "institutionalized"). Who is held accountable, however, varies from organization to organization. While some organizations feel that all three parties are responsible:

"...the organization is really accountable to its shareholders to really develop people all the time; the individuals are accountable to themselves and to the organization in terms of how they develop..."

Others feel that the accountability of managers is critical. The cases indicate that managers in best practice companies play a pivotal role in coaching employees. They assess not only performance but gaps in skills and developmental needs. To ensure managers recognize the importance of these activities, systems are in place in best practice organizations to hold managers accountable for the development of their employees. Some organizations have gone as far as making career development of employees an integral part of the manager's performance evaluation, with weakness in this area impacting on performance ratings and the outcomes attached to them. In these organizations, managers are accountable not only for financial performance (for profit organizations) or performance in product or service delivery (in not-for-profit organizations), but also for people management (best practice organizations consider career development to be an essential component of people management.) For example, in the Systems & Technology unit of the Royal Bank, commencing in 1999, 25% of the compensation of people managers will be contigent on their HR management.

Best practice organizations also publicize and publicly reward those managers who have been exemplary in the area of career development. When Royal Bank recently awarded (through its company-wide Star Performance Program) a manager for her excellence in people management (she won a cruise!), the message could not be clearer to employees that what is valued is not only "good work in customer orientation or support, or saving the Bank a lot of money, or some high-tech solution - it's good people management." The adage rings true: "What is measured gets done; what's rewarded gets attention."

Best Practice Organizations Give Managers Training on How to Help Employees With Career Development

Best practice organizations recognize that for managers to be competent and comfortable in their career development activities, they need to be trained in activities such as how to be an effective coach, how to give performance feedback etc. Some organizations have not provided training systematically and now feel the need to develop this critical skill in their people. Others have moved forward to provide the tools and training necessary for both the coach and the coached (e.g. Royal Bank's Royal Coaching Journey).

Best Practice Organizations Give Employees the Processes, Information, Tools and Resources That They Need to Develop Their Careers

Best practice companies recognize that if they are placing part of the onus for career planning and development on the individual, then the individual must have the processes, information, tools and resources in place to proceed. This is the "support" that is required of the organization. The cases indicate that best practice organizations have indeed provided extensive support to their employees in this regard. Most of the best practice organizations considered in these cases provide a host of information and resources to facilitate individual career planning and development (i.e. provide self-assessment tools, catalogues of internal and external training options and educational opportunities, workshops, and resources in career and personal planning). The key to the usefulness of these resources appears to lie not in how they are offered (i.e. online technology versus less sophisticated means), but rather, in their accessibility, timeliness and perceived relevance.

Best Practice Organizations are Good At Communicating With Employees

Communication of key career development information and initiatives is considered by all best practice organizations to be a critical success factor. They know that new career development tools and initiatives, no matter how good, are useless if not utilized. Many best practice organizations also make strategic use of their career development systems to communicate with employees. For example, many use their job posting system , not only as a means to advertise openings in the organization, but also as a tool to communicate to the employees what's happening in the organization, and to provide employees with a better appreciation of what opportunities are available.

Best Practice Organizations Offer Their Employees a Number of Development Options

Best practice organizations offer and make available to their employees a range of developmental options (for example, formal courses, seminars, workshops, conferences, mentoring). There is also a move toward self-directed, self-paced learning (i.e. "any time-any place learning"). IBM, for example, has converted many of their courses to online versions, not only to contain costs but also to allow for self-paced learning.

Best Practice Companies Emphasize Experiential Learning

Most best practice companies consider "learning from experience" to be the most important developmental strategy (e.g. on the job learning, rotations, assignments, projects). Statistics Canada's Corporate Assignments program (CAD), and career broadening programs reflect a strategy that is endorsed by most organizations.

Best Practice Companies Integrate Career Management Processes into other Key Human Resources Processes

In all best practice organizations examined in this research the career management and development processes are integrated with and supported by other human resources processes such as performance management, succession management, HR planning, and, in many instances, recruitment and staffing. As noted earlier, some best practice organizations even link career development to the compensation and reward system. Good HR practices recognize the interrelationships among the various processes and integrate them in a well-connected system.

In best practice organizations, career development is part and parcel of the performance management process. With performance assessment comes the identification of skills gaps and developmental activities which will enable better performance and a higher level of growth and career aspiration.

Best Practice Organizations Identify and Give Special Attention to High Potential Employees

Almost all of the organizations in these cases identify high potential employees and target them for systematic and more extensive development and exposure, and planned career moves. Best practice organizations:

• identify promising employees at an early age and at an early stage of their career
• "reach deeper into the organization" to identify high potential employees

Best Practice Organizations Focus on Identifying Leadership Throughout the Organization

Best practice organizations also recognize that focussing on high potential employees is not enough - it is also important to pay attention to the "solid citizens", the good contributors who may not be the "high potential employees" or the "high-flyers", but whose motivation and contribution is critical to the success of the organization. Such organizations focus on developing leadership throughout the organization.

Best Practice Organizations Regularly Evaluate Their Career Development System

Evaluations of the effectiveness of the career development system and programs are done with varying degrees of sophistication in best practice organizations. While some track usage of programs, most track satisfaction with training. Almost all best practice companies will have data on the costs associated with training and development. Few, however, are able to quantify the benefits. Many best practice organizations engage in career development programs because they believe in the importance of people.

"....We cannot quantify it...it is something that we know that when we don't do it that our people are not thinking globally, their mind set is not correct, they do not understand the strategy...they don't have the network...The company cannot quantify it, but the payback is there."

Gender Representation at the Top Still an Issue

A consistent but disturbing finding is that despite all the "best-in-class" career development systems and practices in the companies interviewed, the percentage of women in senior level positions is still very low. Organizations may have identified high women potentials in the lower ranks (some even have a higher percentage of them than males) but somewhere along the way up the hierarchy their representation dwindles. Organizations acknowledge that there could be a variety of reasons for the phenomenon and agree that closer study and subsequent action is necessary.

Of particular interest is the fact that many of the competencies in the competency-based systems now in place in many organizations may be characterized as more "female" in nature (e.g. teamwork and cooperation; sharing information and communicating effectively; listening, understanding and responding, etc.). If these competencies are "objective", and are "supposed to get you somewhere", why are the women not "there"? Organizations appear to be quite conscious of the need to accelerate the development of women. Similarly, they are aware that serious assessment of the causes and related issues are warranted.

Caveat

Finally, it needs to be noted that not all of the processes and strategies outlined above will work in every organization. Much depends on culture. While what works in one culture may not necessarily work in another, lessons can be learned and strategies adapted. Organizations should look at their culture and their commitment and evaluate which of the above success factors will work within their own environments.

---

Chapter 5 - Summary and Recommendations

The previous chapters of this document examined career development of knowledge workers in the federal Public Service. Chapter two presents results obtained from detailed interviews with a select⁽³³⁾ sample of 254 federal knowledge workers. These employees worked in 19 different government departments and agencies. Chapter three outlines and explains the survey data collected from a representative sample of 2,350 federal knowledge workers. Thirteen departments and agencies participated in this phase of the research. Chapter four summarizes the career development practices and procedures of seven Canadian organizations who are considered to be on the leading edge of career development. The interview and survey samples were selected and analysed to permit us to generalize the results of this research to the population of federal Public Service knowledge workers. In total, employees from 19 departments representing 48 different job classifications participated in this research.

Conclusions relating to each of these studies have been included at the end of the appropriate chapters and will not be reiterated here. Instead, this chapter of the report will attempt to integrate findings from the three studies, identify key findings, and suggest a number of ways in which the federal Public Service can enhance the career development of their knowledge workers.

---

Summary of Key Findings

The findings from the two research studies are very similar. Both studies suggest that knowledge workers in the Public Service enjoy their work, are keen to learn new skills, take great pride and personal satisfaction in making a contribution to Canadian society and are prepared to take on new challenges. Employees in this group believe they have done a good job and gone beyond what is required of them. They are, however, frustrated by a perceived lack of recognition for the work they do (both within the Public Service and from the Canadian public), the human resources management practices within the Public Service, and by various aspects of the bureaucracy. Many knowledge workers also express frustrations with their salary. The data would suggest that these frustrations have contributed to low levels of commitment and a high propensity to consider other employment.

The majority of respondents in both studies are in the transition/mid-career and later stages of the career cycle and have considerable work experience. Employees in the interview sample had high career mobility (part of their career development strategy) while those who participated in the survey were notably less mobile.

While respondents in both studies have given considerable thought to their career goals, they feel that their immediate supervisor, their department and the Public Service have provided little support for their career development. While virtually all of the employees in the survey felt that the responsibility for career development of employees should be shared (a view which is commonly held by experts in this area), almost all felt that they have been left to manage their career development on their own.

Both studies suggest that employees who wish to advance in the public sector need to adopt strategies which increase their breadth of knowledge (high mobility, lateral moves, acting positions, stretch assignments) and increase their visibility. Having a mentor also helps. Education, training, and hard work, however, do not appear to be linked to career advancement. Unfortunately, the data from both studies would suggest that many employees believe that these strategies (i.e. work hard and further your education) will lead to career success.

Both studies also indicate that the organization can support employee career development by increasing its focus on people; communicating trends/directions; giving employees the opportunity to acquire breadth and to become more visible; helping employees understand their strengths and weaknesses; and by developing mentoring programs. Unfortunately, the data from both studies would suggest that many Public Service knowledge workers do not have access to these kinds of support.

Satisfaction with career progress was high in the interview sample, with 75% of respondents indicating they were satisfied/very satisfied. Executives and respondents in the AEXDP and ADM pools were more likely to report high satisfaction with their career progress (virtually everyone in these samples was satisfied or very satisfied). These findings are not surprising as one would expect those who have progressed through the hierarchy to be satisfied with their progress! Managers, scientists, employees in CAP and MTP, and employees who were not in CDPs were less likely to be satisfied with their career progress.

Half of the employees who participated in the survey phase of the research were satisfied with their current career progress (33% were neutral and 19% were dissatisfied). Respondents were, however, much more pessimistic about their future career prospects in the Public Service: 35% feel it is somewhat likely they will achieve their career aspirations if they stay in the Public Service, 30% say it is not at all likely. Just over half of those in the executive category and 44% of those who have been promoted in the past five years think their career goals will be met in the Public Service. Only 27% of those who have not received a promotion in the past five years are positive about their future career prospects. Similar findings can be observed when we looked at individual items from the job satisfaction scale. Only 24% of the sample were satisfied with their ability to advance in the Public Service.

These findings underline how critical it is for the Public Service to address career development among its knowledge workers. As the results show, there are many benefits to be gained by focusing on this issue (i.e. reduced turnover, greater retention of key workers, higher commitment, reduced stress and frustrations, greater morale) and potential costs if it is ignored (lower commitment, higher turnover, lower morale). Recommendations are given below.

---

Recommendations

Definitions of Career Success and Career Aspirations

To provide appropriate career development supports to employees it is important to understand what it is that they want from their careers. The data from both the interview and survey studies suggest that there is not one common view of career success held by federal knowledge workers. Nor do all workers have the same aspirations. The research indicates that approximately 40% of the study participants ascribe to "traditional" definitions of career success, while the rest espouse newer, more dynamic and holistic definitions.

Those with "traditional" definitions of career success define success in terms of career progress (increased responsibility, advancement to a higher position, succession up the ranks); recognition (rewards, fame); and increased financial rewards. The aspirations of employees in this group are positional (i.e. want to be an ADM, a DM, in a management position) and progression related. Employees in this group define satisfaction with career progress in terms of visible progress and "getting the position they aspired to."

Those with more holistic views of career success define success in terms of satisfaction with the work they do; a personal sense of accomplishment; a chance to make a contribution; and being able to learn and develop new skills. The aspirations of this group revolve around job satisfaction (i.e. want to be in a job I enjoy); feeling a sense of achievement; being in a position where they can learn something new; and doing a job that makes a contribution. Employees in this group define satisfaction with career progress in terms of personal accomplishment, self-esteem, learning, and doing work they like. Employees in this group are rewarded by a sense of accomplishment, a chance to make a contribution, interactions with colleagues and a chance to learn. Many respondents with this more "holistic" view of success indicate that they stay in the Public Service "despite the money - not for the money."

Unfortunately, the research indicates that current Public Service career development practices satisfy neither of these definitions of career success; nor do they help employees in either group meet their career aspirations. Gap analysis indicates that many employees in the holistic group do not feel that their job (as it is currently structured) provides them with a personal sense of accomplishment (gap 36%); offers them the opportunity to learn and develop new skills (gap 27%); or permits them to make a contribution to society (gap 21%). Similarly, many in the traditional group do not feel that their current salary provides a comfortable life style (gap 35%); or that their job provides increasing financial rewards (gap 28%).

Global competition and the new economic reality suggest that the organization of the future will be flatter with fewer opportunities for advancement. It will be harder for those with a "traditional" view of success to realize their aspirations in such organizations. The Public Service needs to change how it defines success and change its reward systems to accommodate this new reality. These data give rise to the following recommendations:

1. Redefine "career success" to include traditional and non-traditional career paths and career aspirations. This re-definition should include changes to the compensation system.

2. Develop different types of career development programs to accommodate these different definitions of success and career aspirations.

Sense of Accomplishment

As noted previously, approximately half of both samples defined career success in terms of "a sense of accomplishment." These employees are satisfied with their career progress when they perceive that they have accomplished something worthwhile and have learned something. Unfortunately, the data suggest that for many federal knowledge workers, the Public Service work culture and the bureaucracy are reducing their ability to obtain a sense of accomplishment from work (gap of 36%). During the interviews, employees stated that they were frustrated by the fact that they never got to see how their work was used, that their feedback was lost or ignored, that their ideas got watered down, that their work was shelved, and that there was little to no recognition of their accomplishments. Finally, it is important to note that the lack of a sense of accomplishment was the main reason given by knowledge workers (particularly those in the scientific and professional groups) for thinking of leaving the Public Service. It is recommended that the Public Service:

3. Identify ways to increase the personal sense of accomplishment felt by its knowledge workers. Specifically the Public Service might:

With respect to the recommendation around autonomy, feelings of accomplishment come from seeing ideas put into action. Employees expressed great frustration with the red tape that inhibited their ability to take action. This suggests that employees will experience a greater sense of accomplishment when they are empowered to get the job done (i.e. remove layers of bureaucracy and excessive levels of approval).

With respect to the provision of greater recognition the government should explore the following options:

• improve salaries, especially at the executive level (concerns about salary are often about recognition as well as money)

• give managers training on how to give and receive feedback

• explore new ways of publicizing the good work the Public Service does (the data suggest that widespread Public Service "bashing" in the media and elsewhere contributes to this issue)

• make employees more aware of existing recognition and awards programs

• redesign recognition and rewards programs to align what is rewarded with what different groups of employees value (the data suggest that the Public Service is "using the wrong carrots" for employees with non-traditional views of success)

The data suggest that career development and planning are strongly linked to the issue of compensation. While 15% of those interviewed indicated that they "stay in the Public Service because of the pay and benefits", 33% said they would leave the Public Service for better compensation. The data suggest that there is a perception among many Public Service knowledge workers (especially in the executive group) that they are underpaid. This perception is the cause of significant dissatisfaction. The issue of compensation needs to be addressed by doing market surveys on salaries for comparable jobs and then either correcting the inequity or, if it is a perception problem, publicizing the market rates to show that salaries are fair. While redressing the salary issue will not necessarily make employees happy, it should remove a key source of dissatisfaction. It may be that until the issue of compensation is addressed, other career development initiatives will not have the desired impact.

Contribution to Society

The data indicate that a substantive number of knowledge workers feel that the main reward of working in the public sector is the chance to make a contribution ("i.e. the average citizen is better off for what I do"; "it's not the money, it's the difference I make"; "I can see the results, effect change"). The chance to make a contribution is especially important to executives and those in federal CDPs (it is the number one reason respondents in these groups say they stay in the Public Service!)

Unfortunately, the data would suggest that the bureaucracy and the work culture in the Public Service make it more difficult for many employees to feel that they are making a contribution. When asked to identify the biggest frustration of working in the Public Service, almost 25% of respondents identified frustrations around results ("I have no control over what happens to my work"; "I never see what happens to the work I do, how my work was used"; "feedback gets lost, your ideas get watered down"). Lack of feedback makes it difficult for these employees to feel that they have made a difference. Enhancing employees' sense of contribution may be key to retaining knowledge workers (especially those in the executive category). The following recommendations are suggested:

4. Identify ways to let knowledge workers know how their work was used by others.

5. Explore ways to publicly reward "contributions to Canadian society."

Accomplishment and contribution are highly inter-related concepts. Many of the recommendations on rewarding accomplishment made earlier have relevance here as well.

Work-Life Balance an Issue

The data indicate that work-life balance is a critical issue within the federal knowledge worker population. The majority of employees in both samples:

• are in the full-nest stage of the life cycle
• are part of the sandwich generation (i.e. have childcare and eldercare responsibilities)
• have significant family responsibilities

Furthermore, almost all of the interview respondents indicate that career success and life success are closely inter-twined (i.e. "you can't have one without the other.") The work-life balance issue arose in both research studies. Approximately 20% of those in the ADM pool said they "didn't ever want to be DM" as the job involved too many hours, too much stress and no chance for balance. Respondents in both studies were frustrated with heavy workloads and the lack of time for family, leisure and community. While executives in the survey study were less likely to say work-life balance was important to them, they were also significantly less likely to say they were able to achieve a balance (75% of executives said work-life balance was important while only 45% said they were able to achieve such a balance!) Particularly disturbing was the finding that parents were less likely to be promoted than non-parents.

While female survey respondents were more likely than male respondents to value work-life balance, the data from both studies suggest that work-life balance issues are more problematic for women. Both the survey and interview data suggest that conflicting work-life goals require many women to make a choice between rapid career development and balance. The following findings reinforce this conclusion:

• A substantial number of women who can be considered to have achieved career success (i.e. have obtained a high number of promotions, are in the EX category or ADM pool) have no spouse and/or children. These women stated that the fact that they have fewer family responsibilities has helped them achieve their career goals. These results suggest that having children is perceived by some female Public Service knowledge workers to be an impediment to career advancement.

• A significant number of the dual-income mothers in this sample are less likely to have been promoted (i.e. can be considered less successful in the traditional sense). These women have less work experience (45% have taken maternity leave) and are less likely to be mobile. This group of women stated that their children had a negative effect on their ability to meet their career goals (i.e. having children reduces their mobility, and their ability to work long hours).

Managing the work-life issue is a challenge but if current conditions are any indication of long-term trends (and the elder care data suggest that they are), the Public Service can be sure of one thing: this "problem" is not going to go away.

From a strategic perspective there are a number of reasons why it is critical that the Public Service look at the issue of work-life balance. First, it will be difficult for departments to meet employment equity targets if capable women self select out of the career development process. Second, succession planning will also be more difficult if career progression is associated with long hours, stress and imbalance. Finally, in work environments where opportunities for promotion are reduced, employees have an increased need to obtain rewards outside of work. A focus on balance would allow employees who are plateaued at work to realize rewards at home or in the community. The following recommendations are suggested:

6. Examine why motherhood and career advancement are perceived by many female Public Service knowledge workers to be mutually exclusive goals.

7. Develop future career development initiatives using a "work-life" lens.

8. Develop explicit policies around the career development of dual-career parents.

Many traditional career development strategies (i.e. relocation, intensive training programs with residential requirements) conflict with desires for work-life balance. Career planning and development programs may be meaningless unless an employee's role as a family member is also considered. What can be done? The research literature in this area suggests the following approaches. From an organizational perspective, successful management of dual-career parents requires flexible work scheduling, special counselling, training for supervisors in career counselling skills, and the establishment of support structures for transfers and relocations. The organization should also develop training programs to help employees acquire competencies to manage their careers through career information and planning, goal setting, and problem solving. Other strategies that have proved successful include job sharing programs and childcare assistance. In any of the above programs, however, measurement and accountability are key. The concept of accountability is outlined in more detail in the following section.

What Career Strategies are Linked to Promotability?

As noted earlier, promotion is one of the most tangible forms of career progression. Data on promotions are used in this study:

• as a surrogate measure of career success (employees who have received more promotions have traditionally been viewed as being more successful)
• to identify what the Public Service values in their knowledge workers
• to distinguish between career strategies that lead to career advancement and those that do not

These data should help employees who wish to advance within the Public Service to identify which career strategies to pursue.

The data show that Public Service knowledge workers who have received promotions engage in a different set of career strategies from those who have not. What strategies are linked to career advancement in the knowledge sector of the Public Service? The data from both the interview and survey studies indicate that those who have been promoted are more likely to be mobile, to have taken acting positions (both at a higher level and at the same level), and to have made lateral moves within and between departments. Those who have been promoted were also more likely to have:

• adopted strategies that built breadth
• focused on highly visible and important work projects
• sought career support from others and acquired a mentor
• developed a style senior managers were comfortable with
• been given developmental opportunities such as stretch assignments and special work opportunities
• had access to career development initiatives including individual career counselling and formal career discussions with a superior
• interacted with senior managers

Finally, it is interesting to note that respondents in the following demographic groupings were more likely to have received a promotion within the past five years: non-parents, women, employees whose first language is French, and those who live in the national capital region (NCR). Respondents who stated that they had a career plan were also more likely to have been promoted than were their counterparts without such a plan.

By comparison, while some of those who had not received a promotion in the past five years indicated that they were happy where they were ("I'm in the position I always wanted"), the majority of those who had not been promoted felt there was a large gap between what they wanted from their careers and their ability to realize their objectives. These gaps appear to be acute with respect to earning a comfortable salary and opportunities for learning and developing skills. Respondents who had not received promotions also appeared to have had access to fewer career development opportunities (i.e. were less likely to have had a mentor, career counselling, formal career discussions with a manager, worked on a stretch assignment, or to have received a special work opportunity).

It is interesting to note that employees who had not received a promotion in the past five years were more likely than their peers who had been promoted to have used career planning workshops. This finding is important in that it indicates an interest on the part of these individuals to further their careers. It also suggests that the material delivered in these workshops is inappropriate in either content or delivery.

Finally, it is interesting to note that hard work (i.e. number of overtime hours worked, exceeding work expectations) does not increase the likelihood of receiving a promotion. Formal education and training appear to have a minimal impact. The following career strategy recommendations should be considered:

9. Redesign career planning workshops to make them more relevant to today's workforce.

10. Explicitly indicate the criteria that will be used in different promotion and advancement decisions.

Such a delineation would help employees to better understand what the organization values and would help them match their career development efforts with their career aspirations. Increased clarity in this area should also reduce misdirection of effort (i.e. many employees in this research seem to think that hard work will be rewarded - the data do not support this assumption), which in turn, may lead to an improvement in critical employee outcomes such as job satisfaction and morale.

11. Use a set of outcome measures, including the "number of promotions an employee receives within a certain time frame" to formally evaluate the success of career development initiatives.

In this research employees who had received a recent promotion were more satisfied with their career progress to date, more optimistic about their prospects for the future, had higher levels of job satisfaction (especially with respect to pay and ability to advance), were more likely to identify with their department, reported higher levels of commitment to the department and the Public Service and were less likely to think about leaving the department or the Public Service.

12. Make career development opportunities and initiatives (such as stretch assignments, special work opportunities, individual career counselling, and formal career discussions with a superior) more available to interested and qualified knowledge workers.

The Individual's Role in Career Development

The data indicate that most Public Service knowledge workers have taken steps to develop their careers: 68% have career goals; 51% have detailed career plans; 97% can identify career development strategies they have tried. Unfortunately, the data also suggest that many employees are using strategies which are not linked to career advancement and are not adopting strategies which are!

The following career development strategies were linked to career advancement and appeared to be widely adopted:

• doing quality work on important things (used by 73%)
• using a style managers were comfortable with (used by 60%)
• showing aspiration to increased responsibility (used by 58%)
• working on high visibility projects (used by 52%)
• obtaining breadth to round skills (used by 46%)

The following strategies were frequently adopted but were not associated with advancement:

• showing initiative (used by 85%)
• exceeding expectations and working hard (used by 73%)
• going well beyond the requirements of the job (used by 73%)
• showing confidence (used by 65%)
• becoming a leader within peer group (used by 60%)
• advocating ideas effectively (used by 59%)
• being a specialist in an important area (used by 55%)

Finally, the following career development strategies were linked to career advancement but were rarely adopted by knowledge workers:

• obtaining a powerful mentor (used by 11% )
• changing departments (used by 13%)
• networking with influential colleagues (done by 26%)

Accordingly we recommend that the Public Service:

13. Make employees more aware of which individual career development strategies are associated with career advancement.

14. Provide interested employees with the opportunity to network with those above them in the organization.

15. Develop and implement formal and informal mentoring programs.

16. Provide managers with training on how to effectively mentor subordinates.

Formal mentoring programs offer a vehicle for meeting the needs of both senior employees who have reached the pinnacle of their careers (and who want to help develop the next generation) and younger employees who want opportunities for growth and development. Managers who mentored subordinates and departments who offered mentorship programs were considered by interview respondents to be supportive of career development. The interview study also indicated that to be a good mentor one also has to be a good communicator (i.e. listen, be interested, and keep employees posted on what is important.) This would suggest that for a mentoring program to work, managers need mandatory training on how to communicate with and effectively mentor subordinates. Many of the best practice organizations examined in Chapter Four provide such training.

Organizational Support of Career Development

While three-quarters of those surveyed believe that the responsibility for career development should be equally shared between employee and employer, only 17% believe this is actually the case in the Public Service. Most (75%) believe that, within the Public Service, employees have to take personal responsibility for their own career development. In fact, in the interview study, the number two piece of advice respondents gave regarding career development/ career advancement was to "take control - no one will do it for you, you are the driver."

What types of organizational support for career development are reported by knowledge workers? Where does this support come from? Both the interview and survey studies paint similar pictures. A minority of those in both samples perceived high levels of career development support from the organization. The supervisor was perceived to provide more support than the department; the department was perceived to provide more support than the Public Service.

The research illustrates a number of ways in which managers, departments, and the Public Service can take more active roles in the development of employees:

Supervisors were perceived helpful if they had good people skills, were interested in the career development of their employees, kept their employees posted on important trends and helped their employees achieve their breadth, visibility and learning goals. They were also considered supportive if they acted as mentors to their subordinates.

Departments were perceived to be supportive when they provided mechanisms to increase breadth (encouraged training, provided learning opportunities, encouraged program participation, provided employees with contact with others outside the department and kept employees posted on trends and opportunities), and when they supported training and formal career development programs. Supportive departments also provided a culture to support managers in their career development efforts and encouraged education, training and career mobility. Departments were viewed as non-supportive when they hindered acquisition of breadth (i.e. through structural barriers, a traditional hierarchy, or through "being too hung up on protocol.")

The Public Service was seen as supportive when it provided the structure under which the above activities might take place (e.g., formal CDPs, communication of key information). It was also recognized as being supportive when it facilitated education and training, made it easier for employees to increase their breadth, and focused on people skills.

These data indicate that, while the immediate supervisor is perceived to be key to career development it is difficult for a supervisor to provide assistance if the culture does not support career development. The case studies and data from the interview indicate that measurement and accountability (at the level of the supervisor, the department and the Public Service) are necessary to effect real cultural change.

Respondents used a number of career development initiatives including job postings, information on future career opportunities, tuition reimbursement, internal training, external training and employee orientation programs. Career discussions with supervisors were highly valued (and linked to career advancement). Unfortunately, this opportunity was available to only half of the employees in the survey! The survey also identified a number of other highly effective development opportunities which were not widely available, including individual career counselling (available to 43%), career planning workshops (available to 41%), job rotation (available to 38%), formal coaching and mentoring (available to 27%), and assessments of career potential (available to only 25%).

Since most career support comes from one's immediate supervisor, the Public Service needs to help supervisors become better people developers. We recommend that the Public Service consider the following initiatives:

17. Assess supervisors on their people management and people development skills (360 degree feedback would be valuable here).

18. Provide managers with training on how to deal effectively with people (i.e. communication skills, negotiation, feedback, conflict resolutions).

19. Devolve responsibility for career development to the level of the immediate supervisor. This will allow managers to tailor developmental opportunities to an individual's needs and values, and avoid the "one-size-fits-all" approach to career development.

20. Provide supervisors with training which gives them the business rationale behind career development as well as the skills and tools they need to become career development "partners" with their subordinates.

21. Keep supervisors informed about future career opportunities so that they can give career counselling to interested employees.

22. Readjust workloads so that supervisors have time to support employee development (i.e. concretely recognize it is a critical part of the management job function).

23. Make managers accountable for the career development of their employees (i.e. measure subordinates' awareness of, access to, and use of various career development initiatives.) Develop accountability around employee participation. Recognize and reward managers who effectively develop their people.

24. Make departments accountable for the career development of their knowledge workers. Establish targets; measure access to, and use of, various career development initiatives; develop executive accountability around employee participation; and recognize and reward departments who effectively develop their workforce.

25. Make effective developmental experiences more accessible to interested employees. The survey and interview data identify a number of such developmental experiences⁽³⁴⁾ including career discussions with supervisor, individual career counselling, career planning workshops, job rotation, formal coaching and mentoring, assessments of career potential, parallel assignments, the opportunity to acquire line experience, the opportunity to mentor younger employees, the opportunity for intensive training funded by the Public Service, challenging new assignments, special work opportunities, and stretch assignments.

26. Involve employees in the development of appropriate career development experiences and programs.

Breadth

Both the interview and survey data indicate that "breadth" of knowledge and experience seems to be one of the most important determinants of career advancement and career success in the knowledge sector. It is also a career strategy that will enhance employability outside the Public Service. Breadth, as defined by participants in this study, includes working in a number of different departments, making a number of lateral moves, taking a number of acting positions, broadening one's expertise, taking stretch assignments, working to full potential, and learning on the job. The importance of breadth is illustrated by the following findings:

• Managers, departments and the Public Service were considered supportive if they helped employees acquire breadth, and non supportive if they hindered its acquisition.

• The number one piece of advice given by interview participants on how to develop one's career and how to advance in the Public Service was to "increase your breadth of knowledge - make a lateral move, broaden your exposure, expertise."

• Even the "select" group who participated in the interview study felt that they were not getting the kinds of opportunities they needed to increase their breadth.

Given the importance of "breadth" to the career development of those in the knowledge sector, it is recommended that the Public Service:

27. Make the importance of breadth (as defined above) widely known.

28. Make it easier for employees to make lateral moves by identifying some of the most likely lateral moves both within and between departments.

29. Develop new strategies to acquire breadth using a "work-life" balance lens (e.g., how can employees gain breadth without relocating)

30. Develop a compensation system which recognizes and rewards breadth as well as depth (the Public Service has a need for both in its knowledge sector).

The above strategies should also help to support a change in career aspirations by validating lateral moves (i.e. given the reality of flatter organizations, the Public Service needs to help employees see that up is not the only way to go!) Lateral moves should also help to satisfy employees' need for new challenges and special projects.

Visibility

Data from both studies suggest that, while breadth may be critical for career development, many employees believe that visibility is essential for advancement. The following quotes typify this belief:

"You can develop skills on your own but to get ahead you have to make sure others see you practising them!"

"It is not just important to be good at what you do - it is equally important to be seen as being good at what you do"

The following data support this belief:

• Almost 40% of those who were promoted had the opportunity to interact with senior managers versus 22% of those who were not promoted

• Almost 25% of the interview sample used career development strategies which increased their visibility (i.e. took a job that put them in touch with people in high places, took tough jobs that put them on the radar screen)

• Managers were considered supportive of career development if they helped the employee get more visibility

• Almost half of the survey respondents said they wanted more opportunities to interact with senior management

Given the perceived importance of "visibility" to career advancement, it is recommended that the Public Service:

31. Make the importance of "visibility" (as defined above) widely known.

32. Make it easier for employees to interact and network with senior management.

Education/Training

Respondents in both samples were highly educated. The majority had at least one university degree; a substantial number had more than one. The research literature indicates that a highly educated work force is, in many ways, harder to manage. Career success is typically very important to employees with higher education. They are also more likely to expect their work to be rewarding and challenging and have greater job mobility. This higher degree of mobility means that the Public Service has to deal with issues confronting their knowledge workers or risk losing many of them.

Other findings around training and education are very interesting and somewhat mixed. While almost 40% of the respondents indicated that they used a career development strategy which involved getting more training, and 11% followed a strategy of increasing their formal education, there is no real evidence from this research that these strategies work. People who emphasize training and education (scientists, officers, and employees who were not involved in a CDP) are less likely to have received a promotion in the past five years; those who have "made it" (executives, ADM pool, AEXDP) were unlikely to recommend career development strategies which emphasize training and formal education. Instead, they encouraged employees to focus on strategies which increase breadth and visibility. Other data suggest that, while employees think learning is important, they value on the job and experiential learning rather than formal training or education. Finally, it is important to note that:

• education and training are seen as ways that the Public Service supports career development

• half of the survey respondents said they wanted the opportunity to take intensive education funded by the Public Service

With respect to education and training, we recommend that the Public Service:

33. Explicitly indicate how formal training and educational qualification are used in different promotion and advancement decisions (i.e. are they considered a requirement for the job, an indication of breadth, an indication of depth, not considered at all?)

34. Redesign training programs to make them more relevant to today's workforce (i.e. experiential learning, on the job training, mentoring).

Equity Issues

Data from the survey and the interview studies suggest that there may be some backlash to government policies around employment equity and diversity. This backlash seems to centre around issues of language, gender and age. For example:

• 25% of men in the interview sample said the fact they were men had made it hard for them to advance

• 14% of interview participants said that equity issues in their department made it difficult for them to get ahead (i.e. they believed opportunities were available only to certain groups)

• younger employees with fewer years of experience were more likely to be promoted than their older counterparts with more years of experience

These data are cause for concern: they may just represent the tip of the iceberg. To counteract these perceptions, we recommend that the Public Service:

35. Provide employees with information on why employment equity and diversity initiatives are necessary.

36. Make recruitment, hiring and promotion decisions transparent.

Federal Career Development Programs

The following findings from the interview study suggest that the Public Service needs to re-examine the design and delivery of their CDPs:

• Only 2% of respondents currently in CDPs would recommend these programs to colleagues as a way to develop and advance their careers.

• One-third of the interview respondents, when asked what one change would make it easier for Public Service employees to meet their career goals, requested that the Public Service develop better career development initiatives and programs. Suggestions included proactive career planning, institutionalized career development programs, individual assessments of career potential (i.e. make it possible for employees to identify their own strengths), individualized career counselling, retraining programs and formal coaching and mentoring programs. Employees who participated in CDPs were more likely to give these responses.

• Not all federal CDP participants had the same career aspirations.

It is also interesting to note that only 2% of those who were not in a federal CDP perceived that these programs would increase their chance for promotion. The data do not support this perception. On the contrary, those who participated in a CDP were more likely to have been promoted. They were also more likely to have had a manager who supported their career development and to have worked in a department whose culture supported career development.

It is hard to determine cause and effect in the above data. Do employees not participate in CDPs because they do not feel they will help OR are they more likely to use this rationale after the fact to justify their not participating in the program? Are the advantages (i.e. management and departmental support) reported by those in CDPs a result of the program or are people in such programs more likely to end up in an area where career development is supported and valued? Given the above findings, we recommend that the Public Service:

37. Offer a broader range of federal career development programs to meet the needs of today's more diverse workforce (i.e. those with traditional definitions of success as well as those with more "holistic" views).

Public Service Culture

The data from both studies suggest that many knowledge workers believe that the Public Service does not value its employees and that the lack of organizational support for career development is just another symptom of this problem. When asked what one change would make it easier for knowledge workers to develop their careers, almost 20% of those in the interview sample asked that the government increase its focus on people (training on people skills, 360 degree feedback, people quadrant of balanced score card). Scientists, officers, analysts, and employees who were not in a CDP were more likely to request this change; executives were the least likely to request this change.

Approximately 15% of interview respondents said that the most frustrating part of working in the Public Service was that "senior management treated public servants badly; devalued them, treated them as second class." When asked how the Public Service could reduce their frustrations these respondents requested that the Public Service become more people oriented (i.e. ask employees what they want, value employees and show employees more respect). It is interesting to note that respondents in the manager category were significantly more likely to report frustration with the culture than were employees in other job categories.

Many of the recommendations given previously in conjunction with organizational support of career development are equally applicable here. The culture might become more people focused if the Public Service: provided managers with information on why people are important and what types of support employees desire; provided training in people skills and mentoring; made developing people part of the manager's role; and introduced measurement and accountability.

Intent to Turnover

The findings from both the interview and survey studies suggest that many knowledge workers are thinking of leaving the Public Service. Twenty percent of those interviewed indicated that their ultimate career aspirations were to work outside the government sector. Three-quarters of respondents from both samples have thought about leaving the Public Service; 21% indicated they were thinking of leaving within the next year! Women, executives, respondents in the ADM pool, scientists, and employees who participated in a CDP were most likely to have thought of leaving the Public Service.

Why would these employees consider leaving the Public Service? The data suggest two quite different sets of motivations: push factors (employees would leave to get away from the frustrations of their job) and pull factors (employees would leave because working conditions were more attractive outside the Public Service).

Push factors cited by employees in both the survey and interview studies include the work culture, political interference, how employees are treated by managers, frustrations with the Public Service bureaucracy, and a lack of recognition and respect. Pull factors include the desire for greater recognition, the opportunity to earn a higher salary (50% gave this response), the desire to engage in more interesting work and a desire to advance. It is interesting to note that all of these reasons for leaving relate to the Public Service work environment, not the nature of the job. What keeps people in the Public Service? The nature of the work, the chance to make a contribution, the challenges of the job, and the people one works with.

Employees who had not received a promotion within the last five years (many of whom are in the scientist and professional category) were also more likely to be thinking of leaving the Public Service. The reasons they gave for leaving were, however, quite different from those cited by other respondents: an unsupportive work environment (see the discussion of the lack of focus on people), limited opportunities for advancement, and lack of job security.

The recommendations given in conjunction with a sense of accomplishment appear to be equally applicable. The large gaps between the desire for, and availability of, a sense of accomplishment and a satisfactory salary, are strongly linked to employees' intent to turnover (i.e. these were two of the key reasons respondents cited for leaving the Public Service). The data also draw attention to the need to increase retention of key knowledge workers (those in the executive, scientific and professional and CDP categories) by devising means to minimize the frustrations, increase the incentives, or both. It should be noted that incentives do not necessarily need to be monetary in nature; they might also be in terms of respect and recognition.

HR Practices

Data from the both the interview and the survey suggest that many employees perceive current HR programs and practices to be problematic. During the interview, over half of the respondents gave HR related answers when asked what one change would make it easier for knowledge workers in the Public Service to meet their career goals. The following aspects of HR were identified as problematic: the job classification system (job categories too structured); specific job requirements (more emphasis on attitude and ability to learn, less on specific technical requirements, remove rigid job requirements); hiring practices (kill term/indeterminate distinctions); recruitment practices; the competition process; the use of acting positions; and staffing processes (it takes too long to hire who you need, can't get right people, can't let people go who might be better off somewhere else).

Almost half of survey respondents felt their department was not going a good job of managing the job competition process. Of particular concern is the finding that only 30% of people who were promoted in the past five years and 38% of executives think that the competition process is fair. Individuals who had not been promoted in the previous five years were particularly harsh in their judgements about the job competition process.

Fourteen percent of respondents stated that the Public Service needed to streamline HR (i.e. cut the red tape in HR, make staffing more user friendly, more flexible, make it possible to hire who you need, reduce turnaround time to hire).

Organizational outcome data provide a second lens through which to assess the effectiveness of current HR policies and practices. Organizational HR policies and practices can contribute to a work environment that either supports or inhibits effective job performance and organizational health. Survey data on organizational health and work environment provide additional support for our recommendation that the Public Service re-examine current HR policies and practices. For example:

• Only 12% of respondents believed their department was doing a good job of managing their work environment

• More than half the sample felt that their department was not doing a good job managing employee stress, employee morale, employee loyalty, employee workload and employee retention

It is important to note that this view of HR appears to be uniformly held (i.e. no gender, job type, etc. differences of note). The following recommendations are made with respect to human resources management:

38. Redesign the competition process. Employee involvement should be sought during this redesign.

39. Align HR policies and practices with the demographics of the Public Service work force (i.e. work-life balance, sandwich generation, elder care, dual-income couples).

40. Redesign HR policies and practices to be more flexible and user friendly.

41. Integrate HR policies and practices with individual departmental missions (the data suggest that there is no one set of programs or policies that will meet everyone's needs).

42. Measure "organizational health" on an annual or bi-annual basis. Measures of organizational health should include (but not be limited to) work stress, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intent to turnover, morale, and satisfaction with career progress. These measures can be used by departments to formally evaluate the success of their career development initiatives and processes. They can also be used in the accountability process.

Impact of Downsizing on Career Development

Approximately 20% of those who participated in the interview process (almost half of those in the scientist and non-CDP samples) were dissatisfied with their career progress because they felt that it was "out of their control." Respondents who held this view stated that "it did not matter how hard they worked, there was always some externality"; "downsizing has reduced opportunities - there is nowhere to advance."

Recommendations given in conjunction with sense of accomplishment and compensation are equally applicable here. These findings also lend further support to the idea that the Public Service has to recognize and reward different types of success (i.e. lateral moves, not just progression up the ranks).

Communication Key

Study respondents indicated that communication of trends and opportunities at all levels (i.e. supervisor, department, Public Service level) was an important component of career development. As can be seen from the case studies, best practice organizations place as much emphasis on communicating what career development opportunities are available as they do to creating and implementing them. Unfortunately, only a minority of Public Service employees stated that their managers, their department or the Public Service were good at communicating. This is consistent with the data presented earlier indicating many Public Service employees do not know which strategies lead to career advancement and which do not. These findings indicate that the government should not simply focus on the generation and implementation of new career development opportunities. In addition, it should:

43. Explore new ways to disseminate relevant information on career development to interested employees.

44. Seek, wherever possible, to involve employees in the design of career development programs and initiatives (i.e. develop channels which facilitate upward communication).

Previous recommendations pertaining to training managers and increasing feedback also have relevance to this issue.

Recognize Job Type Differences

The data show that employees' career development experiences and aspirations are strongly associated with job type. Key differences include the following:

Scientists and Professionals

Employees in this job category were more likely to have used career development strategies which gave them specialized knowledge rather than breadth (i.e have more formal education, are more likely to have taken educational leave and to attribute their promotions to their training/education, and are less likely to make lateral moves within or between departments). Employees in this group are more likely to identify with their profession than with the Public Service or their department and have the lowest commitment to both the Public Service and to their department. The interview data indicate that one quarter of the respondents in the "scientist" group are likely to leave the Public Service in the next year! To retain these employees the Public Service needs to design career development strategies that recognize the unique characteristics and aspirations of employees in this group. For example, employees in this group:

• identify recognition and satisfaction with their work as the keys to a successful career

• have career aspirations which revolve around recognition and respect

• were more likely to express satisfaction with their career progress because "they like what they do - the nature of their work"

• stay in the Public Service because they like their work and the people they work with (not because they feel they can make a contribution)

• were less interested than employees in other groups in career advancement and financial rewards

• don't appear to value breadth

• would be more likely to leave the Public Service because they feel that they do not get recognition or respect for what they do and because they are frustrated with the red tape and bureaucracy

• want special work assignments and training opportunities, rather than promotions

• want sabbaticals, unpaid leave, recognition, and respect

Executives

Respondents in the executive category were more likely to have used career strategies that involve high mobility and acquisition of breadth. Thirty percent of executives and 40% of those in the ADM pool are thinking of leaving the Public Service. To retain these employees, the Public Service needs to design career development strategies that recognize the unique characteristics and aspirations of employees in this group. For example, employees in this group:

• were more likely to think that their department does nothing to support career development

• were more likely to think that career development should be a shared responsibility between employer and employee, but less likely to perceive that it is shared

• were more likely to say they stay in the Public Service because they feel that they are able to make a contribution to society. NONE of the respondents in these groups stay because of the pay and benefits

• were more likely to define success in terms of personal autonomy, moving through positions of increasing responsibility, and in terms of being in positions of authority. While the data suggest these needs are being satisfied at the present time, they should not be forgotten when designing future programs and initiatives.

• were more likely to define success in terms of influencing the organization's direction and being surrounded by stimulating people (The data suggest these needs are not being satisfied at the present time.)

• have more "traditional views" of success than employees in the scientific and professional category (i.e., they value autonomy, authority, progress through the ranks)

Administrative and Foreign Services Group

Employees in this group tended to respond similarly to the executive and scientist and professional categories. In fact, in many cases, their responses were similar to the group average presented in the report. It is, however, important to note that employees in this job category are more negative in their assessments of recruitment practices, the management of workforce diversity, and pay and compensation practices than are employees in the other job categories.

Current federal CDPs have been developed to accommodate different career-cycle stages (i.e. MTP, CAP, AEXDP, ADM pool). The data collected in these studies suggest that job type differences are also important determinants of career aspirations and strategies. Consequently we recommend that the Public Service:

45. Develop CDPs which take into account job type differences in career aspirations and definitions of career success.

---

Appendix A - References on Career Development

Arthur, M.B., Hall, D.T. & Lawrence, B.S. (1989). Handbook of career theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Barner, R. (1994). The new career strategist: Career management for the year 2000 and beyond. The Futurist, Sept-Oct, 8-14.

Baumann, B., Duncan, J., Forrer, S. E., & Leibowitz, Z. (1996). Amoco primes the talent pump. Personnel Journal. 75, 79-84.

Brass, D.J. (1985). Men's and women's networks: A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization.. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 327-343.

Bratkovich, J.R., Steele, B. & Rollins, T. (1990). Develop new career management strategies. Personnel Journal, 69, 98-108.

Brousseau, K. R., Driver, M.J., Eneroth, K, & Larsson, R. (1996). Career pandemonium: Realigning organizations and individuals. Academy of Management Executive. 10, 52-66.

Burack, E. H. & Mathys, N. J. (1980). Career management in organizations: A practical human resource planning approach. Lake Forest, Ill.: Brace-Park Press.

Burke, R.J. & McKeen, C.A. (1990). Mentoring in organizations: Implications for women. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 317-332.

Carulli, L. M., Noroian, C. L. & Levine, C. (1989). Employee-driven career development. Personnel Administrator. 34, 67-70.

Cascio, W. & Thacker, W. (1994). Managing Human Resources: 1st Canadian Edition. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson

Constable, A. (1993). Bridging the gap: Linking assessment to development. International Journal of Career Management. 5, i-ii.

Cooper, W.H., Graham, W.J. & Dyke, L.S. (1993). Tournament players. In K.M. Rowland & G.R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Volume 11, (pp 83-132). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Dreher, G. F. & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 75, 539-546.

Dyke, L.S. (1990). Self-promotion in organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queen's University, Kingston, ON.

Dyke, L. S. (1993). Gender differences in self-promotion strategies. In L. Hammond-Ketilson (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1993 Annual Conference of the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, 14, (11), 34-43.

Dyke, L. S. & Murphy, S. A. (1998, August). How we define success: A study of what matters most to women and men. Paper presented at the meetings of the Academy of Management, San Diego, CA.

Ellis, R. & Henemen, H.G. III. (1990). Career pattern determinants of career success for mature managers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 5, 3-21.

Ettington, D. R. (1997). How human resource practices can help plateaued managers succeed. Human Resources Management. 36, 221-234.

Gattiker, U. E. & Larwood, L. (1988). Predictors for managers' career mobility, success, and satisfaction. Human Relations, 41, 569-591.

Gattiker, U.E. & Larwood, L. (1990). Predictors of career achievement in a corporate hierarchy. Human Relations. 43, 703-726.

Gould, S. & Penley, L.E. (1984). Career strategies and salary progression: A study of the relationships in a municipal bureaucracy. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 244-265.

Granrose, C. S. & Portwood, J. D. (1987). Matching individual career plans and organizational career management. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 699- 720.

Greenhaus, J. H. (1987). Career management. Chicago: Dryden.

Greenhaus, J. F., Parasuraman, S. & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 64-86.

Gutteridge, T.G., Liebowitz, Z.B. & Shore, J.E. (1993). Organizational career development: Benchmarks for building a world-class workforce. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Healey, A. (1998). Implementing a skill-based career development program: How one organization integrated staffing and compensation to reach success. American Compensation Association, May, 15-20.

Herriot, P. (1992). The career management challenge: Balancing individual and organizational needs. Sage: London.

Herriot, P., Gibbons, P., Pemberton, C. & Jackson, P.R. (1994). An empirical model of managerial careers in organizations. British Journal of Management, 5, 113-121.

Hill, L. & Kamprath, N. (1991). Beyond the myth of the perfect mentor: Building a network of developmental relationships. Boston: Harvard Business School Case 9-491-096.

Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. W. & Bretz , R.D. Jr. (1995). An empirical investigation of the predictors of executive career success. Personnel Psychology, 48, 485-519.

Jukes, J. (1996). New career management program: A 'win-win' opportunity. Canadian Manager. 21, 13-14

Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.

Kaye, B. & Leibowitz, Z. (1994). Career development: Don't let it fizzle. HRMagazine: On human resource management. 39, 78.

Klauss, R. (1981). Formalized mentor relationships for management and executive development programs in the federal government. Public Administration Review, July/Aug, 489-496.

Kram, K.E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: cott, Foresman.

Kram, K.E. & Isabella, L.A. (1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relationships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 110-132.

Latack, J. C. (1990). Organizational restructuring and career management. In G. R. Ferris & D. M. Rowland, (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources, Volume 8 (pp. 109-139). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Leibowitz, Z. B., Feldman, B. H. & Mosley, S. H. (1990). Career development works overtime at Corning, Inc. Personnel. April, 38-46.

London, M. & Stumpf, S. A. (1982). Managing careers. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Lyness, K.S. & Thompson, D.E. (1997). Above the glass ceiling? A comparison of matched samples of female and male executives. Journal of Applied Psychology. 82, 359-375.

Mayo, A. (1991). Managing careers. London: Institute of Personnel Management.

Mayo, A. (1992). A framework for career management. Personnel Management., 24, 36- 39

Melamed, T. (1995). Career success: The moderating effect of gender. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 47, 35-60.

Melamed, T. (1996). Validation of a stage model of career success. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 45, 35-65.

Milkovich, G.T. & Anderson, J. C. (1982). Career planning and development systems. In K. M. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Personnel Management (pp. 364-389). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Morrison, A. M., White, R. P. & Van Velsor, E. (1987). Breaking the glass ceiling. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Moses, B. (1997). Career intelligence: Mastering the new work and personal realities. Toronto: Stoddart.

Murrell, A. J., Hanson Frieze, I. & Olson, J. E. (1996). Mobility strategies and career outcomes: A longitudinal study of MBAs. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 49, 324-335.

Nicholson, N. (1996). Career systems in crisis: Change and opportunity in the information age. Academy of Management Executive, 10, 40-51.

Nusbaum, H.J. (1986). The career development program at Du Pont's pioneering research laboratory. Personnel, 63, 68-75.

Orpen, C. (1993). The effects of employment gaps on employee career prospects: An empirical study. The Journal of Social Psychology. 133, 853-854.

Orpen, C. (1994). The effects of organizational and individual career management on career success. International Journal of Manpower, 15, 27-37.

Ragins, B.R., Townsend, B. & Mattis, M. (1998). Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Academy of Management Executive, 12, 28-42.

Rosenbaum, J. E. (1979). Tournament mobility: Career patterns in a corporation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 220-241.

Rosenbaum, J. E. (1984). Career mobility in a corporate hierarchy. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Scandura, T. A. (1992). Mentorship and career mobility: An empirical investigation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 169-174.

Schein, E.H. (1996). Career anchors revisited: Implications for career development in the 21st century. Academy of Management Executive, 10, 80-88.

Schwoerer, C. E. (1990, August). Individual characteristics, active career management, and career outcomes. Paper presented at the meetings of the Academy of Management, San Francisco, CA.

Stevens, P. (1993). Career development assistance strategies. International Journal of Career Management. 5, 30-34.

Stewart, L. P. & Gundykunst, W. B. (1982). Differential factors influencing the hierarchical level and number of promotions of males and females within an organization. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 586-597.

Stone, T. & Meltz, N. (1993). Human Resources Management in Canada, Toronto: Dryden.

Stroh, L.K, Brett, J.M. & Reilly, A.H. (1992). All the right stuff: A comparison of female and male managers' career progression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 251- 260.

Tharenou, P & Conroy, D. (1994). Men and women managers' advancement: Personal or situational determinants? Applied Psychology: An International Review, 43, 5- 31.

Tharenou, P., Latimer, S. & Conroy, D. (1994). How do you make it to the top? An examination of influences on women's and men's managerial advancement. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 899-931.

Van Tiem, D. & West, A.C. (1997). Career self-management: Employability for the new millennium. Performance Improvement, 36 (7), 9-13.

Veiga, J. (1983). Mobility influences during managerial career stages. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 64-85.

Whitely, W., Dougherty, T.W. & Dreher, G. F. (1991). Relationship of career mentoring and socioeconomic origin to managers' and professionals' early career progress. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 331-351.

Wilhelm, W. R. (1983). Helping workers to self-manage their careers. Personnel Administrator, 28, 83-89.

Williams, S.T. & Fox, C.J. (1995). Organizational approaches for managing mid-career personnel. Public Personnel Management, 24, 351-363.

Wils, T. (1994). Factors explaining why managers quit: Importance of a career. Industrial Relations. 49, 152-159.

Wils, T., Guerin, G. & Bernard, R. (1993). Career systems as a configuration of career management activities. International Journal of Career Management. 5, 11-15.

Wright, P.C. & Belcourt, M. (1994). Management development: A career management perspective. International Journal of Career Management. 6, 3-10.

---

Appendix B - Sources Used in Developing the Questionnaire

Dreher, G. F. & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 75, 539-546.

Dyke, L.S. (1990). Self-promotion in organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queen's University, Kingston, ON.

Gould, S. & Penley, L.E. (1984). Career strategies and salary progression: A study of the relationships in amunicipal bureaucracy. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 34, 244-265.

Granrose, C. S. & Portwood, J. D. (1987). Matching individual career plans and organizational career management. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 699- 720.

Greenhaus, J. F., Parasuraman, S. & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 64-86.

Gutteridge, T.G., Liebowitz, Z.B. & Shore, J.E. (1993). Organizational career development: Benchmarks for building a world-class workforce. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McKeen, C & Burke, R. (1992). Supporting the career aspirations of managerial women: Desired developmental opportunities. National Centre for Management Research and Development, Working paper series No. NC 92-010-J.

Mowday, R., Steers, R. & Porter, L. (1979). The Measurement of Organizational Commitment, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.

Orpen, C. (1994). The effects of organizational and individual career management on career success. International Journal of Manpower, 15, 27-37.

Ragins, B.R., Townsend, B. & Mattis, M. (1998). Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Academy of Management Executive, 12, 28-42.

---

FOOTNOTES

1 Cummings, T. and Worley, G. (1997) Organizational Development and Change, 6th Edition, South Western: Ohio.

2 Bourgon, J. (1998). Fifth Annual Report to the Prime Minister, Cat. No. BT74-1/10-89.

3 Ibid

4 Defined as employees in the Executive, Scientific and Professional, and Administrative and Foreign Service categories.

5 Employment Statistics for the federal Public Service, TBS, BT22-63/1998

6 In-placement emphasizes employee retention and creative employee movement to other jobs. Closely associated with it are strategies such as retraining and cross-training.

7 1997-98 Annual Report of the Public Service Commission (p.3)

8 Bourgon, J. (1998). Fifth Annual Report to the Prime Minister on The Public Service of Canada (p. 17).

9 Treasury Board of Canada, (1998). Employment Statistics for the federal Public Service: March 1, 1997 to March 31, 1998.

10 Levinson, D. (1978) The Seasons of a Man's Life, Knopf, New York.

11 Statistics Canada (1997). Characteristics of Dual-earner Families, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Catalogue Number 13-215-XPB.

12 Schemerhorn (1993) Managing for Productivity, Wiley: Toronto.

13 Schwartz, F. (1992). Breaking With Tradition: Women and Work and the New Facts of Life, Warner Books: New York. (p 87).

14 Cascio, W. & J. Thacker, (1994). Managing Human Resources, McGraw-Hill Ryerson: Toronto.

15 Respondents were asked to include in this total any secondments, lateral moves, and acting positions that they considered to be promotions.

16 In a number of cases aggregate measures were compiled from a number of questions (for example, job satisfaction overall). In these cases high scores were defined as greater than 3.5 on a 5-point scale, low scores as less than 2.5.

17 Data supplied by Treasury Board.

18 See for instance Kanter, R.M. (1977), Men and women of the corporation (New York: Basic Books); Tharenou, P & D. Conroy (1994), "Men and Women Managers' Advancement: Personal or Situational Determinants?" Applied Psychology: An International Review, 43 (1); or Ely, R.J. (1995), "The Power in Demography: Women's Social Constructions of Gender Identity at Work." Academy of Management Journal, 38.

19 Armstrong, P. & Armstrong, H. (1994). The double ghetto: Canadian women and their segregated work, Third edition. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd.

20 Cooper, W.H., Graham, W.J. & Dyke, L.S. (1993). Tournament players. In K.M. Rowland & G.R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Volume 11, (pp 83-132). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

21 Longenecker, C.O., Sims, H.P., & Gioia, D.A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. Executive, 1, 183-193.

22 Stroh, L.K, J.M. Brett & A.H. Reilly (1992). "All the Right Stuff: A Comparison of Female and Male Managers' Career Progression," Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 251-260.

23 Granrose, C.S. and Portwood, J.S. (1987). "Matching individual career plans and organizational career management." Academy of Management Journal, 30, (4). 699-720.

24 Orpen, C. (1994). "The effects of organizational and individual career management on career success." International Journal of Manpower, 15 (1), 27-37.

25 Granrose, C.S. and Portwood, J.S. (1987). "Matching individual career plans and organizational career management." Academy of Management Journal, 30, (4). 699-720.

26 Duxbury, L and Higgins, C. (1998). Work-Life Balance in Saskatchewan: Realities and Challenges. Saskatoon: The Government of Saskatchewan.

27 Tuma, N.B. and Grimes, A.J. (1981). "A comparison of models of role orientations of professionals in a research-oriented university." Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 187-206.

28 Fitz-Enz, J. (1993). Benchmarking Staff Performance, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

29 Levels do exist in terms of scope of responsibility. There is an equivalent of a VP of Human Resources at HP for example who uses this title when dealing with the public, but internally goes by the title of manager.

30 Specific, Measurable, Action Oriented, Realistic, Timeline

31 As developmental needs evolve, programs must be assessed and new programs developed to address new needs. Assessment as to "What's the useful life of a program?" is on-going at the Bank.

32 Merit/salary increases are based on skills and competencies achieved; bonuses are tied to the Bank's performance and the individual's performance and contribution to the unit.

33 This sample was not chosen to represent the total population of federal sector knowledge workers but it was "selected" to allow us to examine the impact of gender, job type and participation in a federal career development program on career development.

34 Opportunities which are desired by employees and linked to career advancement, but which are generally unavailable

 

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•