Underlying Factor Structure of Schein’s Career Anchor Model

W. Brent Barclay · Jared R. Chapman · Bruce L. Brown

28 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Career Assessment

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Career Development and Diversity Psychometric Methodologies and Testing Higher Education and Employability

Abstract

More than 20 years after Edgar H. Schein introduced career anchor theory (1977), Daniel Feldman and Mark Bolino critiqued both the theory and the methods Schein used to describe career anchors. They propose that understanding the underlying factor structure of the Career Orientations Inventory (COI) will give insight into the relationships between multiple career anchors. These relationships describe which career anchors are complementary (i.e., having congruous characteristics) or mutually inconsistent (i.e., having oppositional characteristics) and enable a study of the degree to which those relationships have an impact upon career outcomes. This study examined how well each of the four models of career anchor relationships, found in the career anchor literature, describe mutually inconsistent relationships found within data from seven empirical career anchor studies. The mutually inconsistent career anchor pairs suggested by Feldman and Bolino were not found to have stronger negative correlations with one another than those proposed by the other three models. Also, the mutually inconsistent pairs proposed by Feldman and Bolino were not found to have on the whole a better fit from confirmatory factor analysis than those proposed by the other three models. Instead, Schein’s proposed model of mutual inconsistency was the best fit, albeit, a weak fit. Weaknesses were also found in the two-dimensional octagonal models proposed by Feldman and Bolino, by Chapman, and by Bristow. The data do not support a two-dimensional model. An additional finding was that the relationship between the anchors actually fits an orthogonal model better than either the complementary or mutually inconsistent representations proposed by each of the four models. Continued research opportunities are available for those interested in studying career anchor theory.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

References

1999Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.1988Handbook of Organizational Behavior 1978Career Dynamics: Matching Individual and Organizational Needs 1971The Individual, the Organization, and the Career: A Conceptual Scheme 1987Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher's z transformation be used?1985Career Anchors: Discovering Your Real Values 1991Career Orientations of MIS Employees: An Empirical Analysis 1977Organizational careers : some new perspectives

Cited by

2019Um estudo das relações entre gênero e âncoras de carreira 2016Schein’s Career Anchors 2020Entrepreneurial passion for founding as a mediator of the career anchors to entrepreneurial behavior relationship 2018A Model For the Development οf Employees’ Learning (Career Path) in Industrial Enterprises

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.