CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1INTRODUCTION

This chapter reviews relevant literatures and theories on career, career aspirations, career choices

and career success. Furthermore, the influence of career choices and how career success is

measured will be elucidated from literature. The chapter continues with the review of literature

on the glass ceiling phenomenon and stereotyping in order gain an understanding of what the

terms refers to, their prevalence and influence on individuals, organizations. Finally, a

conclusion of the chapter is drawn.

2.2CAREER

‘A career can be described as the evolving sequence of a person’s life and work experiences over time.’ (Hughes 2004, p.86)

The definition of career is understood differently. The traditional definitions tend to restrict

career to a professional work life which included progression. The notion and nature of careers

was traditionally based on highly structured, hierarchical and rigid structure; and several

researchers sought to broaden this conceptual definition and meaning of the term career. For

example, Schein (1978) relates to career as “anchors” a motivational and or inspirational inner

feeling for an individual. He mentioned that the career life cycles are made up of stages- fantasy,

growth and exploration. Another view of career by Super (1980) defined career as “the

combination and sequence of roles played by a person during the course of a lifetime” (p 282).

Here the author discussed a group of nine roles that were non-formal or non-professional (i.e.,

parent, worker, spouse, child, student, citizen, pensioner and “leisurite”). Thus career is not

limited to professionals but can also be referred to anyone who works outside of organizations

(e.g., Richardson, 1993; Arthur, Hall, & Lawrence, 1989). Arnold (2001) gave a similar

broadened conceptual definition of career as “the sequence of employment-related positions,

roles, activities and experiences encountered by a person” (p. 116).

Arthur, Khapova and Wilderom (2005); Hall (2004) in their studies, refereed to career as the

unfolding sequence of an individual’s work experience over time. This definition emphasizes on

the centrality of the themes work and time. The definition doesn’t adopt any static view of work

arrangements but rather focuses on the relevance of time instead. It is one of the widely accepted

definitions of career (Baruch, 2004). The definition does not constraint the assumptions on where

people work or what should determine career success. It accommodates a view of career success

based on a person’s upward mobility within an organization, but just as a special case of

extensive possibilities. These can include the horizontal and upward mobility within recognized

organizational or national contexts (Arthur, Khapova and Wilderom, 2005).

2.2.1 Career Perspectives

Careers is known to have two dimensions namely external (objective) and internal (subjective).

The objective career (external) has to do with the sequence of an individual’s work-related

positions or offices within the respective organization (Groeneveld, 2009), while the subjective

career (internal) reflects a person’s own sense (values, interests and motives) of his or her career

and valuing the sequence of positions (Groeneveld, 2009). It is the individual’s interpretation of

his/her own career or work situation at any point in time (Khapova, Arthur and Wilderom, 2007).

A significant aspect of the subjective or internal careers is career aspirations which refers to

peoples’ self concept, belief and values about themselves in the work environment with respect

to their capability, worthy and significance in their occupations (Rosenberg, 1979).These notions

have led to most of the corresponding concepts of career aspirations that have been researched in

most career development studies. Examples are the internal career (Bigliardi, Petroni and

Dormio, 2005; Ituma, 2006), career orientations (Igbaria, Kassicieh and Silver, 1996; Erdogmus,

2004; Kim, 2004; Buchanan, Kim and Basham (2007) and career anchors (Schein, 1978;

Marshall and Bonner, 2003).

Most research and theory about careers have evolved around the above mentioned dimensions.

However, the internal (subjective) career seem to be more significant and being more

increasingly recognized as it is expected for individuals to take greater responsibility for

directing and interpreting their unfolding careers (Hall, 2002). A foundational and

comprehensive model of career for understanding internal careers is Schein’s career anchor

theory. Schein (1987, p.158) defines a career anchor as “that one element in our self-concept that

we will not give up, even when forced to make a difficult decision”.

Schein’s career anchor theory assumes that individual’s can only have one career anchor and

when developed the anchor is unlikely to change. This leads to the suggestion that individuals

will seek career or job opportunities that strengthens this anchor (Ituma and Simpson, 2006).

This theory has received empirical support (e.g., Igbaria et al., 1991; Petroni, 2000) as well as

several critiques (e.g. Feldman and Bolino, 1996). Feldman and Bolino (1996), were of the

opinion that there is likely possibility of individuals possessing multiple relevant career anchors

rather than the the notion of Schein that individuals can only have one stable career anchor, as

individuals can have different career and life goals.

Igbaria et al. (1991) noted that Schein’s career anchor is a starting point from which to explore

and develop understanding of individual’s internal careers (career aspirations; career choices and

career success) and the reaction of employees to various career development opportunities. Thus,

the theory has been applied to different occupational groups (IT, accountant, academia) to

understand the needs individuals aspire to fulfil (Ituma and Simpson, 2006; Cullen and

Christopher, 2012; Agarwala, 2008). Although, it can be argued that Schein’s anchor theory

which is US-based and a reflection of its unique structures and institutions will be unlikely to

fully capture career orientations of and career experiences individuals in different national

context or a non-western context like developing countries e.g. Nigeria as a result of the likely

impact of national culture and societal instituitions (Ituma and Simpson, 2006).

2.3CAREER ASPIRATIONS

Career aspirations are defined as “a construct embodying individuals’ occupational identity and

desired career goals” (Danziger and Eden, 2006). Several authors have different description and

perception of career aspiration. Career aspirations are highlighted as an important individual

factor as they shape the individual’s career journey (Schein, 1996). Accordingly, Schein (1978)

suggested that the self perception of an individual with regards to his/her abilities, attitudes,

talents, values and needs determines the kind of career that matches their personality and what

they intend or aspire to achieve from their chosen or respective career.

Career aspirations are referred to as the individual’s desires or expectations pertaining to career

(Rasdi, Ismail and Garavan, 2011). Aspiration is defined as “the strength of an individual’s

motivation to achieve progressively higher or conversely lower goals based on the experiences

of success and failure, his own and of others who constitute his reference models” (Vig and

Singh, 2000, p. 4), in view of this definition, the expected level of achievement could be referred

to as aspiration.

Danziger and Eden, (2006, p.115) argued that career aspirations are “linked to individuals’

expectations of occupations and jobs” and the perceptions of the individuals are “ideas and

judgments, which are a product of a mental process of organizing, integrating, and recognizing

phenomena”. This definition recognizes the idealistic career goals which are the desired career

aspirations and the mental process of developing the career aspirations over years. Dazinger and

Eden (2006) refer to the difference between the idealistic or desired career aspirations and the

development of career aspiration as the “expectation gap”. Litzky and Greenhaus (2007)

highlighted in their studies that the career aspirations of individual’s acts as a motivational force

that triggers effort and determination towards achieving set goals or targets. Further, Khallad

(2000) and Watson et al. (2002) mentioned that factors such as gender, occupation,

socioeconomic status and educational level have a significant influence on individual career

aspirations.

2.4CAREER SUCCESS

Career success can be defined as the positive outcome or perceived achievement of an

individual’s career experiences: accomplishing perceived or desired work-related outcomes

(Arthur, Khapova and Wilderom, 2005). The achievement of specific desired work-related

results and aspirations in an individual’s career and work experiences over time implies a

successful career (Okurame and Balogun, 2005; Dolan, Bejarano and Tzafrir, 2011).

Baruch (2004) described individual career success as a set of desired outcomes, which vary

between individuals. He further explained that individuals are motivated by the prospect of these

different outcomes in their careers.

Igbaria, Kassicieh, and Silver (1999) noted that an individual’s elucidation and interpretation of

career success depends on the particular career orientation of the person. They were of the view

that career aspirations, perceptions, values and effective reactions to work-related experiences

form aspects of the internal (subjective) career that have heavily influences job commitment,

satisfaction and retention within an organization. This study supports Schein’s (1978) concept of

career anchors that an individual’s career decisions and choices are determined by the internal

career, which will then lead to the individual’s objective and subjective career success.

Career success as a career outcome is described as having both objective and subjective

dimensions (Gattiker & Larwood, 1988; Judge et al., 1995; Nabi, 1999; 2003; Baruch, 2004;

Breland et al., 2007). It is measured along these two dimensions: external, ‘objective’ visible

indicators and subjective ‘internal’ individual perception (Groeneveld, 2002; Hall and Chandler

2005; Heslin 2005; Ng, et al., 2005; Baruch and Quick 2007; Abele and Spurk 2009).

2.4.1 Objective Career Success

The objective career success refers to the external categories in a profession that is publicly

accessible (Arthur, Khapova and Wilderom, 2005), and typically illustrates the steps or

movements toward success. These movements can either be horizontal (increased job security)

or hierarchical (promotions and different job title). Objective career success is mostly concerned

with individual’s observable, directly measurable and verifiable (Abele and Spurk, 2009)

achievements in terms of income, position, promotion or hierarchical status, upward functional

mobility or progression, occupational status and performance (Hall 2002; Groeneveld, 2002;

Dette, et al., 2004; Heslin 2005; Ng, et al., 2005; Dries, Pepermans and Carlier 2008).

Compared to subjective career success (which is perceptual and evaluative criteria), the objective

career success is neutral and not biased in empirical assessment as its most widely used

indicators such as salary, status and promotions can be both externally assessed by means like

work records and confirmation from employees (Dette, Abele and Renner, 2004). These

indicators reflect societal norms and understandings’ regarding how successful a career is, and

are objective in the sense of being socially shared (Abele, Spurk and Volmer, 2010) instead of an

individual evaluation that is central to a subjective description of career success (Arthur,

Khapova and Wilderom, 2005). Objective achievements like income or hierarchical status are

proxies for performance. Many studies tend to use only income as the measure for objective

success. However, it is argued that objective criteria for success such as income and status can be

a less valid indicator for career success as they can be affected by factors that can be deficient

and beyond an individual’s control. For example, as a result of substantial differences in

countries such as the power structures, economic and social stratification, taxation systems and

markers of status, the objective success experienced in some occupations are more strongly

affected (Hollenbeck and McCall’s (2003). Furthermore, individuals in occupations like teachers

and academic mentors base their objective success not in either income or status but rather other

attainments like hard data on the learning and in terms of achievement of their pupils (Parsons,

2002; McGrath, 2003). These potential deficiencies in objective success measurement are

commonly dealt with by measuring the subjective career success of individual’s in conjunction

with their objective attainments (Heslin, 2005).

2.4.1 Subjective Career Success

The subjective or internal is generally referred to as the personal satisfaction one achieves in

his/her career or one’s job related accomplishments (Orser and Leck, 2010). It is defined as an

individual’s feelings (actual and anticipated) of career-related attainment across a broader time

frame that exceeds one’s immediate job satisfaction as well as a wider range of outcomes (not

objective), such as recognition or sense of identity (Greenhaus, Callanan, & Godshalk, 2000;

Law, Meijers, & Wijers, 2002). The subjective career success is concerned with self-career

related evaluation and internal apprehensions, across any dimensions that are relevant to a person

(Arthur, Khapova and Wilderom, 2005). Subjective career success is typically measured using

self-perception of career accomplishments and expected career prospects (Dries et al. 2008).

Individuals evaluate their career success with regard to personal criteria such as their career

aspirations and ambitions. Interpretations of career success vary amongst individuals as well as

their views on career concepts – in terms of direction and frequency of movement within an

organization or any workplace. Examples of other criteria’s for subjective career success are job

satisfaction or career satisfaction (Arnold & Cohen, 2008).

Some studies have confirmed that both objective career success and subjective career success are

interrelated (Judge, Kammeyer-Mueller and Bretz 2004; Ng et al. 2005; Tu et al. 2006). Previous

studies like Gattiker and Larwood (1988), Peluchette (1993), Nabi (2003), Maimunah and

Roziah (2006) and Hennequin (2007) stressed the relevance of examining the subjective career

success together with objective career success as a result of their implications to the quality of

working life and psychological wellbeing of employees. Similarly this study will examine both

subjective and objective measures of career success by measuring the subjective career success

of individual’s in conjunction with their objective attainments as suggested by Heslin (2005).

2.5CAREER CHOICES

For a “career choice” to take place, there are two conditions that needs to be available: firstly, the

availability of an alternative career option and secondly, is the individual preference between the

career options (Agwarla, 2008; Ozbilgin, Kusku and Erdogmus, 2005).

Most researchers are of the opinion that personality traits and demographic variables form the

basis for which individual career choice behaviors are predicted (Ozbilgin, Kusku and

Erdogmus, 2005). Consequently, in an attempt to ascertain career choice influencing factors,

studies have focused largely on the aptitudes, interest, opportunities etc of individuals. Few

research reports that career choices of individuals are often constrained by socio-cultural,

economic and political changes (.Swanson and Gore, 2000; Brown and Associates, 2002;

Sullivan & Baruch, 2009; Wong and Liu, 2010). Hence, career choice is not unbridled

(Agarwala, 2008).

There are numbers of career options available for individuals at any given point in time and they

are likely to be influenced by several factors including external factors (economic status, labor

market etc), individual factors (family background, attitude and cultural values, education etc.),

(Agarwala, 2008; Ozbilgin et al., 2005; Ozkale et al., 2004; Kyriacou et al., 2002). By making

the most of one’s abilities, interests, passions, thoughts and skills, an individual would be

capable of reaching a realistic career choice (Agarwala, 2008). This aligns with the suggestion of

Schein (1978) that the self perception of an individual about his/her needs, values, abilities,

talents, skills and attitude reveals the career that is best fit and matches up with their personality

and the expected outcomes (aspirations) from their career.

Findings from the research conducted by Ng, Burke, and Fiksenbaum, L. (2008) carried out

among MBA students in the US indicated that the national cultures and values were significant

influences the career choice and career prospects of the students. A survey conducted by Monica

and Kate (2005) among information technology students showed that parental education and

choices of career and education played the most significant role in influencing the children's

career choices in information technology field. Likewise, Agarwala (2008) who surveyed among

a population of management students in India concluded that fathers played the most significant

role in influencing the career choice of their child.

Carpenter and Foster (1977) and Beyon et al. (1998) proposed a three dimensional model of

career choices which is one of the most widely used classification in career choices studies. They

divided career choices into; “intrinsic” (e.g. interest in the job, personally satisfying work);

“extrinsic” (e.g. availability of jobs, prestigious or high earning occupations), “interpersonal”

(e.g. parental influence and significant others). A study by Gokuladas (2009) which focused on

the Southern geographic zone of India was conducted among undergraduate engineering student

to determine the factors their first-career choice, indicated that intrinsic reasons was the main

driver for male students career choices while extrinsic reasons had the most influence on female

students. This highlights gender differences in individual career choices. Also, the studies found

that students from urban areas were more likely to be influenced by intrinsic factors whereas

those from the rural/semi urban areas were more likely to be influenced either by extrinsic or

interpersonal reasons

Again, Agarwala (2008) explored the factors influencing management students in India, where

she found out that intrinsic reason such as skills and competencies were the most influencing

factors affecting the first-career choice of students rather than extrinsic or interpersonal reasons.

Another longitudinal study of engineering students by Edvardsson Stiwne (2005) explained that

students are influenced by extrinsic factors e.g. job market conditions

Recent empirical study by Choo, Norsiah and Tan (2012), conducted in a Malaysian

manufacturing plant to determine the factors influencing the career choices among R&D

engineers, found that perceptions of person-job fit and financial rewards were the main factors

that were most influential in their career choice.

2.6 GLASS CEILING

Glass ceiling is a phenomenon mainly used in signifying and explaining an invisible

impenetrable barriers preventing the upward or vertical movement of individuals in the society

or organisation. The ceiling is a metaphorical term that refers to the ceiling preventing

individuals in the minority group (e.g. women) from entering into the labor market and from

gaining access to the top management and senior positions (Tlaiss and Kauser, 2010). The “glass

ceiling” helps to explaining the reasons for the lack of or poor representation in leadership, top

management and decision-making staus (Abidin et.al, 2008). It is mainly used to describe the

difficulties women experience in both reaching executive position in any organization or

climbing to higher societal positions.

An explanation for the glass ceiling concept is considered to be organisational culture and

leadership positions being heavily occupied by men (Cullen and Christopher, 2012). Individuals

especially those in the minority group that are able to get through the front door of managerial

hierarchies still perceive they have to exhibit specific characters(e.g. leadership styles) and take

actions in line with masculine stereotype associated with the qualities of being a good manager

(Powell and Butterfield 2002). Individuals who are aspire to attain senior positions in

corporations (private or public), education and nonprofit organizations are in some cases faced

with impeding factors preventing them achieving their aspirations and succeeding in their

different careers as a result of the glass concept (Lockwood, 2004). Oakely (2000) was of the

opinion that two vital rationalizations were significant for the continuation of glass ceiling in

organizations’ they include: societal cultural and behavioral issues and those related to existing

barriers in organizations.

Another foremost sign of the effects of glass ceiling is gender-biased compensation. Further to

this, a study by the Global Gender Report (2009) on the gender gap between women and men on

economic participation confirmed an existing wide gap, with only 59 per cent of the gap been

closed. Furthermore, a more recent study cited by Okafor, Fagbemi and Hassan (2011) found

that; women failed to progress to senior managerial positions in ratio to their number in the

workplace; negative perception of female superiors from their subordinates; prevalence

unfavorable attitudes of male superiors toward having female in managerial position and a high

probability rate of a female employee not promoted to top executive slot irrespective of her

proven abilities exceeding that of her male counterparts. Characteristics of organizations with

glass ceiling as identified by Fagenson-eland and Parker (1998) as follows: non-supportive

working for female employees, draw attention to gender differences, low female participation in

group or team activities as a result of gender differences, little or no career advancement support

for female employee to prepare them for decision making positions or management positions.

Suggested ways by which glass ceiling can be prevented could be; for organizations to identify

and eradicate the cultural practices that are gender-biased as well as any type of gender prejudice

(seems to be in favor of group of individuals (e.g. men) in the echelons of the organisational

power. Mainiero and Sullivan (2005) in their studies highlighted the need for organizations to

examine the level of balance and security made available to their both male and female employee

so as to ensure professional women get as much experience as their male counterparts. Thus

reducing gender differences and enhancing motivation for female career advancement.

2.7CULTURE

The cultural background of individuals often determines their experiences at early socialisation

and later influences their attitudes and behaviors, which is also reflected in their occupational

roles (Fagenson, 1986; Harragan, 1977; Horner, 1972; Riger and Galligan, 1980; Schein, 1973,

1975). Through this process of socialization, male and female gender acquire their prescribed

role-relate skills and engage in activities that are likely to be required of them so as to be

afforded opportunities and to achieve positive outcomes as deemed necessary (Eagly, Wood and

Diekman, 2000b; Ismail and Ibrahim, 2007).

Omadjohwoefe (2011) in his study of the Nigerian archetype, argued that despite the fact that

gender difference been a human invention, it forms the basis of gender role differentiation which

highlights the female gender as playing an inferior role to the male gender. He further opined

that female employees in highly skilled jobs are highly regarded, but nonetheless, they faced

difficulties in moving upwards the ladder or to certain high ranking position in Nigeria; which is

mainly attributed to the sharp believes and traditional practices inherent in the existing largely

stereotypic value system .

Agbalajobi (2010) pointed out that notwithstanding the vital roles played by women in Nigeria

(mother, time manager, social and political activists) and their population in the country, they are

not given the desired recognition in addition to the fact that they are in most cases discriminated

against. This is also attributed to the cultural stereotypes, sharp believes, traditional practices as

already identified by Omadjohwoefe (2011). Consequently, the patriarchal societal structure

existent in the country tends to place women at a disadvantage. With limited success achieved

thus far in eradicating these negative stereotypical believes and practices, the career

advancement opportunities for female employees in Nigeria is adversely affected

(Omadjohwoefe, 2011).

2.7.1 GENDER STEREOTYPE

Stereotypes are cognitive schema and clusters of perceived personality traits applied to social

groupings (DeLamater and Myers, 2007). Stereotypes is the notion that certain members of a

group will possess the traits and behavioral characteristics that are attributes and expected of

individual members of that group(Cleveland et al.,2000; Bono and Duehr 2006). Gender is

strongly linked to the concern of stereotyping and refers to the socially constituted inter-

relationships between both sexes. Gender stereotypes reflect shared social beliefs, values and

norms that dictate the characteristics and behaviors (roles) which are ascribed to individuals

(men and women) based on their gender or sex (Eagly and Carli, 2003). Danziger and Eden

(2007) argued that the gender differences between male and females does have a significant

influential impact on the eventual career accomplishment, despite both sexes possessing the

same academic and education level.

Research in social psychology (Desert & Leyens, 2006; Smith & Bond, 1999; Williams & Best,

1986) has shown that stereotypical beliefs are widely shared and present in all cultures that have

been studied. For example, a study conducted by North-Samardzic and Taksa (2011) to examine

the impact of gender culture on women’s career trajectories in the Australian finance sector

argues that there is a significant influence of gender culture in some organizations that imposes

pressure on women to comply with masculine behavioral norms.

While interviewing women in Australia, Anne Ross-Smith (2009) found evidence that women

were reticent and ambivalent to promotions in their career and this was having a negative impact

on their career advancement. The evidence was also in line with previous studies conducted by

Powell and Butterfield (2003) which found that the career aspirations to top management of male

university students in the US was significantly higher compared to female students in the same

study. Wellington, Kropf and Gerkovich (2003) highlighted the findings of a research conducted

in the US by Catalyst, an orgainsation focused on improving opportunities for women in

business, which found evidence that women had a low desire to advance to senior level positions

which also acted as a barrier to their career progression into decision making or more senior roles

in their respective careers.

A research in Scotland conducted by Gammie et al. (2008) in Six big accounting orgainsations

showed that women had a different attitude may have a negative impact on their career

progression, they further proposed that such attitudes may be as a result of inherent factors in the

female gender. Further, evidence indicated that the women in the orgainsations appear to lack the

drive and ambition compared to their male peers. The women described the men as confident,

career-oriented and ambitious, whereas describing themselves as hardworking, loyal and

dedicated. Furthermore, the study also found that the accounting firms maintained a macho

culture in respect to long working hours which tend to a problematic issue for female employees

with family who are trying to balance their work and private life.

The lack of drive and ambition attitude of the female employees indicated above in the

accounting profession appeared to be a reaffirmation of previous research findings carried out by

Gammie et al. (1997) where the study found that women in comparison to men had a lower

expectation or prospects of being promoted to partner within an interval of five yrs. When asked

of their promotion prospects, 93% of men had expected to be promoted while 73% of women

expected to be promoted. Thus, indicating lower career progression expectations of women.

In line with the attitude of women found in the research above, a recent study by Dolan,

Bejarano and Tzafric, (2011), conducted to explore the effect of gender in the relationship

between individuals’ aspirations and career success among male and female engineers in Peru

indicated a positive relationship between the individual career aspirations and career success for

the male, but not necessarily for females. Female participants were more interested with secure

career orientations with a preference for a balance between work and family than the men, thus

reflecting and confirming the significant difference gender does make.

2.7.2 OCCUPATIONAL GENDER STEREOTYPE

Occupations are been perceived as being performed principally by male and females and thus

requiring feminine or masculine attributes in order for an individual to be effective in fulfilling

that role (Gurgao, ca2006). Further studies confirms that certain class of jobs/occupations are

been created which are subject to societal stereotypes as a result of sex segregation (Gutek 1988

in Miller, Neather, Pollard and Hill 2004a cited Gurgao ca2006).

Schein’s (1975) early work highlights that the characteristics and skills required for the

managerial position in orgainsations was ascribed closely to the male sex without a recognition

of the need to judge on the basis of individual merits, thereby sex-typing the role as a male

occupation (Schein, 1973, 1975, 2001, 2006; Schein et al., 1989). Studies by Lyness and

Heilman (2006), Wood (2008) and Schein (1975) demonstrates that there is a perceived

incongruity between the attributes stereotypically considered to be necessary to fulfill the roles

that are sex-typed as male, and the attributes that are ascribed to men and women. Attributes

such as strength in decision making, desiring responsibility, forcefulness, ambition and

objectivity are often assumed to reside in men, and these qualities are commonly considered to

be necessary fulfill roles sex-typed as male; examples of such roles are management and

leadership positions. However, qualities such as supportive, affiliation, nurturing and relationship

oriented are ascribed to females, and these attributes are historically perceived as not suited and

associated with the decision-making role of management and leadership. Previous studies

spanning three decades have shown that management role is strongly associated with a male

gender type, hence giving more confidence to male managers and management student alike of

achieving managerial success (Schein, 2001). Research studies have confirmed the prevalence of

such gender stereotypical views and gender prejudice which are in favor of the male gender are

in the higher echelons of organisational power and are capable of exerting significant influence

on the career progression of females in the work place. For example, wood (2008), in her study

of gender stereotypical attitudes on women career advancement in Australia, found that

management roles were gender stereotyped, which thereby influencing attitudes toward the

appropriateness of females in management and leadership roles. This study further confirms that

of Schein (1973, 1975), which reported that management roles are seen as more appropriate for a

male, and such gender stereotypical attitudes were instrumental in impeding the career

prospects of females gaining entry into management role.

2.8CONCLUSION

Careers unfold over time and career success is measured using either subjective (intrinsic) or

objective (extrinsic) career components. Although, each of the components are interdependent,

previous research studies confirms that the duality of both career success measures (subjective

and objective) make each relevant to the other and influence each other over time. Thus, most

career researchers have argued the importance of considering and assessing both perspectives of

career as the depth of the career success construct can be better seen from looking through both

lenses at the same time.

The criteria mainly used by research studies for objective career success includes salary or

income, promotions and hierarchical or occupational status. While the most common criteria of

subjective success is one’s interpretation or assessment of career achievement and experience,

for instance, career or job satisfaction and comparative judgments (Arnold & Cohen, 2008). As

suggested by career researchers (e.g., Arthur,Khapova, & Wilderom, 2005; Heslin, 2005) this

research would assess both the subjective and objective career success using criteria from each of

both career aspects.

It was also found that individuals had different perception of the conception of career and career

success. Further finding also supported the idea of gendered careers. Female employees were

more motivated by subjective (intrinsic) aspects of the job while their male counterparts were

motive by the extrinsic (objective) aspects of the job (Groeneveld, 2009). This highlights the

relevance of comparing the subjective and objective career perceptions of both male and female

in the case study of this research to confirm the idea of gendered careers and further assess if this

would have a possible influence on the career progression of female employees.

The literature review further revealed that individual career aspirations are truly intrinsic and is a

significant influence on the direction of one’s career. Research confirmed that successful

managers from different organizations attributed their success to strong desire and motivation to

succeed. The research further indicated that they possessed strong beliefs, values and interest that

were in conformance to their career aspirations (Rasdi et al 2009). Thus, confirming that

individual career aspirations are significant to career behavior of an individual which at the long

run determines one’s career success. This would aid the objective of this study in finding out if

female employees possess a strong or low desire to succeed and aspire to progress in their career;

and to find evidence if a low desire or lack of aspiration may act as a barrier to their career

progression.