Career mobility in organizations: implications for

career development – Part I

Thomas N. Garavan Lecturer in Human Resource Development, University of

Limerick, Ireland and Michael Coolahan Electricity Supply Board, Limerick,
Ireland

Reviews the literature on A rational, individualistic perspective

career mobility and considers Introduction ignores the fact that human resource policies
its implications for career Strategic approaches to training and career are sometimes ambiguous or misleading
development practices within development are now discussed with consid- about the ways in which promotional oppor-
organizations. Focuses on erable regularity in the HRD literature. This tunities are determined. It downplays con-
individualistic and organiza- change of emphasis has brought with it a straints on career paths because of the desire
tional perspectives and iden- realization that the effective management of not to dampen employee motivation levels[4].
tifies a range of factors which an individual’s career within the organiza- Organizational approaches are also limited in
facilitate or inhibit the mobil- tion can make an important contribution to that they are not easily related to individual
ity process. Identifies a range an organization achieving competitive advan- characteristics and experience or their actual
of career development impli- tage from within. career paths within the organization[5].
cations including changing Garavan[1] refers to the growing body of Given the complexity of internal labour
notions about what consti- literature on the relationship between organi- market structures and the emergence of mul-
tutes a career, the need to zational commitment and career issues and
take into account business tiple job ladders in many modern organiza-
the need to manage the career of an employee tions, it can be safely posited that the Horatio
issues and the move towards in a strategic fashion. There is, however,
joint career planning. Alger idealized career pattern of office boy to
considerable confusion about what consti- president will not be easily realized in the
tutes career mobility and development in
future because access to higher-level posi-
practice.
tions has become increasingly closed to those
This confusion stems in part from the fact
who start at the bottom rung of the job ladder.
that career theorists have to date tended to
Moreover, the emergence of job ladders
focus their attention on either:
divides the labour force because the relatively
• the individualistic approach to careers
privileged position of those within the lad-
which generally takes the view that career
advancement is a function of background, ders gives them an incentive to exclude oth-
education, ability, job experience, ambition, ers. A system of “haves” and “have nots” is
timing, etc.; or created and tends to perpetuate itself[6,7].
• the organizational approach which views A further feature of the modern organiza-
careers as a structural issue. Slocum[2] tion which directly affects career prospects is
contends that individual careers in organi- the adoption of new technology. Educational
zations are determined by, for example, criteria and demands for technical knowl-
internal labour market structures, vacancy edge lead to the segregation of higher skilled
chains, and organizational politics. from lower skilled jobs and the virtual elimi-
nation of the bridge between both, i.e. the
The individualistic perspective tends to
dead-end job has become the rule rather than
assume that employees assess their career
the exception.
prospects accurately, make optimum human
Cassell[8] argues that the emergence of
capital investments and have a good under-
specialized education has led to the horizon-
standing of the factors that affect their future
tal stratification of organizations, limited
mobility. This view of careers is, however,
somewhat simplistic, specifically on the issue upward mobility and the creation of barriers
of career decision making. Phillips et al.[3] which impede mobility within the organiza-
have identified three such styles: tion’s divisions and departments. He con-
1 rational: where the advantages and disad- tends that this has two consequences:
vantages of various options are considered 1 limited career prospects and variety of
logically and systematically; experience which inhibits an employee’s
2 intuitive: where various options are consid- psychological and intellectual growth;
ered and the decision is made on gut feeling; 2 lack of experience and, specifically experi-
Journal of European Industrial
Training 3 dependent: where the individual essentially ence at the shopfloor level has reduced the
20/4 [1996] 30–40 denies responsibility for decision making supply of people with the overall under-
© MCB University Press and waits for other people or situations to standing of the organization needed to be
[ISSN 0309-0590] effective leaders.
dictate what they should do.
[ 30 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and Moreover, “stratification by credentials” has
Michael Coolahan led to the development of a management What constitutes a career and
Career mobility in organiza- cadre that has achieved its position in the career mobility? Some definitional
tions: implications for career
absence of experience at the bottom rungs of issues
development – Part I
the ladder, and a followership that has grass- What constitutes a career?
Journal of European Industrial
Training
roots experience but no opportunity for verti- An immediate problem facing the researcher
20/4 [1996] 30–40 cal movement. in the area of careers is the fact that the liter-
While it is accepted that organizations ature is extant but fragmented. This charac-
cannot fulfil every employee’s promotional teristic can be observed in the many compet-
expectations, many barriers exist which ing definitions of “career” put forward.
impede intra-organizational career mobility. For example, Wilensky[10] writing from a
There is support in the literature for the view sociological perspective defined a career in
that such barriers result from a failure on the structural terms as a:
part of human resource practitioners to inte- succession of related jobs arranged in a
grate individual and organizational perspec- hierarchy of prestige, through which per-
tives within career development practices or sons moved in an ordered (more or less
what is termed by Garavan[1] as “career predictable) sequence.
planning” which focuses on the individual Hall’s[11] more psychologically-oriented
and “career management” which focuses definition defines it as:
more on the plans and activities of the organi- a perceived sequence of attitudes and behav-
zation. iours associated with work related experi-
It is also accepted that barriers to career ences and activities over the span of a per-
mobility create dysfunctional outcomes for son’s life.
both the organization and its employees. The Both definitions reinforce the common per-
former suffers from an inability to optimize ception of a career to be a series of jobs which
its return on its human resource investment are played out over time in a hierarchically
because of failure to identify its best talent organized setting. However, Wilensky’s defin-
and the evolution of internal labour market ition is inherently restrictive in its emphasis
structures which creates bureaucratic barri- on vertical mobility. The common perception
ers prohibiting staff redeployment, particu- of a successful career involves successive
larly where trade unions are involved. linear movement up the functional-line orga-
Barriers impact on the latter category nizational career ladder, gaining along the
because internal job mobility is seen as an way additional increments in formal author-
important component of career advancement ity, intrinsic/extrinsic rewards, etc. However,
and failure to fulfil psychological needs this ignores the fact that in many organiza-
results in decreased motivation and commit- tions, horizontal or lateral movement (at the
ment to organizational goals. same level in the hierarchy) is encouraged
In this paper the authors will concentrate and very often necessary as a means of
mainly on barriers that affect intra-organiza- acquiring the necessary broad experience
tional career mobility as opposed to inter- before moving from a specialist to a more
organizational mobility. This approach has generalist management position.
more validity since the organization repre- Preoccupation with vertical mobility fails
sents the most pertinent status hierarchy for to recognize that for “early” managers in fast
many. Furthermore, it is more sensible to growing high-technology[12] the very notion
study career attainment within occupations of “career” as a sequence of moves may have
or organizational hierarchies because this is little meaning; instead, managers can experi-
where most of the advancement occurs, not ence career growth “inplace” (without mov-
between occupations[9]. It is accepted, how- ing) as their function or department expands
ever, that careers can and do exist outside the beneath them.
organizational setting and that vertical move- Garavan[1] points to research showing that
ment is not necessary for an individual’s individuals and organizations view careers
ability to form a meaningful career, viz: doc- differently. Such research shows that while
tors, dentists, artists, etc. employees are more interested in opportuni-
In the first part of this paper the authors ties for advancement, obsolescence of techni-
will look at some definitional issues relating cal skills, ageing, impact of a decline in com-
to careers and mobility, review the literature pany performance, etc., employers are more
on career mobility from both individual and concerned with ensuring that managerial
organizational perspectives and consider succession is orderly and efficient. He further
some of the development implications aris- emphasizes that organizations desire their
ing. Part II considers these issues in the con- employees to pursue career development
text of a specific organizational setting. which is relevant to organizational goals and
[ 31 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and are essentially interested in making sure that kinds of mobility which result from the grad-
Michael Coolahan there is a good match between the person and ual accumulation of small changes in job
Career mobility in organiza- the job. duties with increased responsibility, and
tions: implications for career Essentially a career is something that an those which do not. This distinction is impor-
development – Part I
individual experiences but is not solely of tant because employees may experience the
Journal of European Industrial his/her own making. The way in which orga- illusion of mobility when in fact their career
Training
20/4 [1996] 30–40 nizations are organized and the way in which is “blocked”.
the employment relationship is organized Even the most cursory review of the careers
defines the type and scope of career an literature reinforces the view that in order to
employee may have. Moreover, once recruited fully understand the dynamics of career
to an organization, an individual’s chances of mobility it is necessary to distinguish
mobility are better if the organization oper- between organizational and individual levels
ates a policy of promotion from within. of analysis. At the organizational level the
Equally, employees’ mobility prospects emphasis is on creating a suitable career
depend not only on their ability and motiva- system which co-ordinates staffing activities
tion but also on the position of their specific into a process that helps the firm adapt to its
job within the organization’s internal labour environment[21]. At the individual level the
market[13]. For the purposes of this paper a emphasis is on how people make sense of
career will be defined as a pattern of work- their own individual careers and where they
related experiences that span the course of an fit into this organizational process.
individual’s life. This definition allows for the When careers are examined from the indi-
incorporation of objective as well as subjec- vidual’s perspective it is important to recog-
tive notions of career, and does not confine a nize the distinction between the
career to professional and managerial occu- internal/subjective and external/objective
pations or conventional career paths involv- meanings of a career. This distinction has
ing increased seniority within a single occu- important implications for individual career
pation and/or organization[14]. outcomes and career development.
The latter point is important within the Schein and Van Maanen[22] postulate that
context of a multi-disciplinary organization an individual’s definition of a career, or the
such as will be discussed in Part II of the internal career, is a person’s own subjective
paper, where the degree to which an internal idea about work life and his/her role within
labour market exists and its complexities it. For example, an individual who is consid-
significantly defines the scope of an individ- ered to have achieved hierarchical success
ual’s organizational career, and career devel- may not be satisfied with his/her level of
opment ultimately determines whether an advancement, or an individual may not con-
employee gets “stuck” in the hierarchy. sider a move to a higher level position if that
position is perceived (by him/her) to be a step
How is career mobility defined? What backwards in the prestige stakes. Put another
objective measures may be used to define way psychological success (i.e. success in
career success? relation to one’s own goal and values) is a
Gattiker and Larwood[15] suggest that the major career motivator for most people.
frequency of promotion within an organiza- An objective career on the other hand is
tion is a valuable indicator of career success defined by title, rank, salary level, formal
and mobility, since it is important for an status, etc., all of which are visible and
individual’s climb up the corporate hierarchy.
defined externally to the employee[23].
Kotter[16] found that those headed for the top
had usually been promoted out of their posi-
tions within 2.4 years. In similar studies, Career mobility: the individual
Heuseman and Hatfield[17] and Birch and
context
McMillan[18] found that a manager changes
his job within a company on average 2.9 times The individual perspective on careers has
during his/her career. generally been the domain of psychologists.
Schein[19] suggests three dimensions of The focus is generally on independent vari-
career mobility within a firm: increasing ables that predict career mobility. Issues
centrality and acceptance to the core organi- researched included education, social class,
zational membership; lateral movement gender and family influences.
across functions; and hierarchical ascension,
through promotions. Social class determinants
Creedy and Whitfield[20] argue that inter- Ironically the very first wave of career
nal mobility has not been comprehensively research (almost 50 years ago) focused on
researched and is difficult to measure. They occupational mobility, specifically the
point to the difficulty in measuring those relationship between social class and
[ 32 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and intergenerational changes in occupation upgrading. It also predicts two opposing
Michael Coolahan status[24]. effects in relation to career mobility. On the
Career mobility in organiza- Of most relevance to this paper, however, is one hand, since well-educated and trained
tions: implications for career the work of Blau and Meyer[25] who workers can start their working careers at a
development – Part I
suggested that social structure influenced higher-level occupation, their careers are
Journal of European Industrial
career in two ways: likely to involve fewer distinct occupations
Training
20/4 [1996] 30–40 1 It shaped the social development of the than less educated workers. In addition, high-
individual and thus his/her career orienta- skill careers might involve fewer changes in
tion, self concept, values, interest. tasks over time (fewer hierarchical move-
2 It affected the occupational opportunities ments are open to highly skilled specialists)
available to the individual. and fewer changes of firm. On the other hand,
The effects of family background on career more educated and trained workers, having
attainment was initially studied by Miller started their career at a higher level, face
and Form[26], and replicated by other sociolo- longer career ladders and greater opportuni-
gists. While there is some disagreement ties for hierarchical advancement.
among sociologists about the strength of this Access to education is differentiated
relationship, Roberts[27] points out: according to social class; Breen et al.[31] in
the assertion of the social class approach their study of participation levels in the Irish
that job opportunities partly depend on educational system found that:
position in the social structure cannot be pupils from an upper non-manual back-
denied. ground (i.e. whose father is an executive,
manager or professional) were at least six
A more recent study by Hout[28] on social
times more likely to sit the Leaving Certifi-
mobility in Ireland proves statistically that cate Examination and thirteen times more
the advantage of upper middle class origins likely to enter third level education than
in relation to career attainment is significant. boys from an unskilled or semi-skilled
Hout demonstrates that: labouring family background.
in numerical terms, upper professionals’
sons have a chance of landing a good job that Internal career self-concepts
is six times higher than the chance of pro-
Attention has already been drawn to the need
prietors’ sons and twenty four times higher
than the chance of semi-skilled workers’ to differentiate between the internal meaning
sons. given to a career by the individual and the
objective or external perception of a career as
A plausible explanation for these statistics in formal position, status, hierarchy, titles,
can be observed from research by Blau and etc.
Duncan[29]. They suggest that the most influ- An individual’s internal or career self-
ential forces on career attainment come from concept is developed as a result of early
the individual’s social class background,
socialization and experiences in the work-
specifically the father’s occupation and
place where employees learn what they are
father’s education. These two forces were
good at and what motivates them. The values
found to be strong predictors of a person’s
of the particular society also contribute to
education and their first job. This in turn
this process.
could predict their current job.
Schein[32] formulated a conceptual model
which articulates that different career orien-
Education and professional training
tations develop. He described these orienta-
In developing a theory of career mobility,
tions as “career anchors”. Schein[33] concep-
Sicherman and Galor[30] analysed theoreti-
tualized careers as a process of finding a
cally and empirically the role and signifi-
career anchor which becomes a guiding focus
cance of occupational mobility (mobility with
the context of moving up the hierarchy) in the in an employee’s life, giving him/her a self-
labour market focusing on an individual’s image built around needs, motives, talent and
career and taking into account investment in values. Schein argues that the career anchor
human capital (education and professional is an:
overriding concern or need that operates as
training). They propose that inter-firm career
a genuine constraint on career decisions.
mobility (“promotion”) is uncertain and
The anchor is the thing the person would
subject to employer decision-making
not give up if he or she had the choice.
processes; the probability of promotion is a
function of schooling, ability and job experi- He identified five career anchors: technical-
ence. functional; managerial competence; creativ-
The theory predicts that, given an occupa- ity; security and stability; autonomy and
tion of origin, education and training independence. The significance for individu-
increased the likelihood of occupational als and organizations of employees having a
[ 33 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and particular “career anchor” or what could also However, Holland’s theory does not explain
Michael Coolahan be called “mindset” can be observed as fol- the process by which effective career deci-
Career mobility in organiza- lows. sions are made[36], or the process of personal-
tions: implications for career
First, career anchors can create barriers to ity development and its role in vocational
development – Part I
career mobility for individuals. For example, selection[38]. Arnold et al.[36] refer to evi-
Journal of European Industrial
Training
an individual with a “security anchor” may dence which suggests, for example, that peo-
20/4 [1996] 30–40 be content to work hard enough to maintain ple with high self-esteem make better career
job security and a reasonable income, but decisions than people with low self-esteem.
may be unwilling to challenge for a higher Osipow[38] refers to the problem of not
position. An employee with a “technical being able to start a career in the “primary”
career anchor” such as an engineer may be area of interest and suggests that “chance”
unwilling to forgo his/her main competence can play a significant role in career choice.
to move up to a general management position He adds that education plays an important
where this expertise will not be required. A role since it commits a person to a certain
similar argument can be made for a craft course of action and eliminates others.
person moving into a supervisory position.
Second, most organizational cultures Low growth need
restrict esteem to those who climb the hierar- Although a person may have the ability to
chical ladder. Therefore, in order to advance perform at a higher level in the organization
career-wise, individuals with a strong techni- he/she may not value highly enough the
cal competence career anchor may move rewards increased responsibility may bring.
upwards hierarchically to management or
supervisory positions with disastrous conse- Self-imposed constraint
quences for both self and organization as a Dalton et al.[39] suggest that some employees
result of the misfit[34]. may not understand the consequences of
The latter example is analogous to the para- passing up promotional opportunities in
dox outlined by Gattiker and Larwood[15] to
their early careers. The opportunity cost of
the effect that the individual could achieve
not developing the necessary social and tech-
“objective” career success, but because of
nical skills at an early stage may lead to pre-
their internal perspective, experience poor
mature career plateauing.
career satisfaction.
Driver[35] in a similar vein developed a
Familial influences – dual career families
conceptual model of internal career maps. He
Research shows that community ties, such as
described four “career self concepts” that
relatives and friends living in the same geo-
underpin a person’s thinking about his/her
graphical area, have a negative impact on
career and also seem to be built into certain
employee mobility[40-42]. Forster[40] refers to
occupations or organizations, i.e. transitory,
studies on managerial attitudes to relocating.
steady state, linear and spiral. Given the age
Sixty per cent of the managers surveyed by
profile of many organizations, individuals
the Institute of Manpower Studies (IMS) in
who subscribe to a linear concept will have
difficulties with their career. Arnold et al.[36] 1987 had at some time refused a job because of
argue that the fast pace of societal and tech- family commitments. Two-thirds of a group of
nological change generally favours the spiral managers surveyed in 1986 over the age of 35
and transitory career concepts, but these would not accept a job move, or accept it only
have not historically been perceived as nor- with reluctance. The principal non-work
mal or legitimate patterns in many organiza- reason given by employees for refusing job
tions. moves is the potentially disruptive effect on
spouses and other family dependants.
Career choice Another influence affecting employee atti-
One of the most influential theories of career tudes towards promotion is the growing num-
choice is Holland’s[37]. Basically it suggests ber of dual-earner or dual-career couples in
that people with particular personality traits the labour market. Research by Hall and
will choose predictable types of occupational Hall[43], on the effects of dual careers on
environments. He identified a range of per- mobility, found that transfer and relocations
sonality types which are compatible with were the main problems for both two-career
particular occupational environments. Hol- couples and for companies. Hall and
land’s hypothesis is based on the notion of Isabella[44] found that the financial indepen-
congruence, i.e. people will have a more suc- dence of the dual-earners lessened the moti-
cessful career when there is a good match vation to relocate, particularly if the spouse
between the individual’s personality (orienta- had to forgo his/her career to accommodate
tion) and the occupation they have chosen. the move.
[ 34 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and Age Other studies have shown that women have
Michael Coolahan The negative correlation between increasing difficulty in acquiring a mentor in male dom-
Career mobility in organiza- biological age and career mobility is widely inated jobs[50,51]. In mobile dual career fami-
tions: implications for career accepted. However, the strength of this rela- lies the dominant “bread winner” is usually
development – Part I
tionship may vary depending on the organi- the male[41].
Journal of European Industrial zation and it is difficult to measure. Other
Training
20/4 [1996] 30–40 variables such as education, experience, skill,
etc. may be more significant in inter-organi- Career mobility: the organizational
zational promotion contests[45]. context
Rosenbaum[46] suggests that organizations
It is clear that a considerable number of indi-
have occupational age norms that indicate
vidual factors influence an individual’s
career progression norms. In many organiza-
career success. However, careers are usually
tions, if by the age of 40 a person has not been
made within organizations and therefore
promoted to a managerial position, he/she is
career dynamics are influenced to a consider-
seen as behind schedule and may never attain
able degree by matters organizational. The
that position.
Ornstein et al.[47], provides further infor- complexity of the internal labour market
mation on the effect of age on career mobility: (ILM) structure, the type of career system,
• the mid-life transition period (age 40-45), size, structure, technology, organizational life
associated with Levinson’s model of Life cycle, etc. shape mobility patterns, career
development, was consistent with a reluc- development opportunities and the kinds of
tance (if a promotion required a move) to career an individual can have. These vari-
relocate in order to avoid family disrup- ables can be best described as moderating in
tion;. influence.
• the decline stage, associated with Super’s
career development model, was consistent Internal labour market
with withdrawing from the job/career, and Once inside an organization, an individual’s
individuals at this stage were least likely to career mobility prospects are dependent on
relocate if requested to do so[48]. the extent to which “promotion from within”
policies exist, and whether one’s job is in a
Gender/race job ladder or not.
There is a considerable body of research and Internal Labour Markets (ILMs) are charac-
literature explaining how racial and sexual terized by recruitment at specific “points of
discrimination and the treatment of ethnic entry”, formally defined job ladders that
minorities may influence career dynamics. provide individuals with promotional oppor-
Despite increasing participation rates in tunities, and centralized pay systems. ILMs
the labour force worldwide, very few women offer advantages to both employee and
have risen to positions of leadership and employer: the former enjoys security of
authority. Martin et al.[49] analysed the main employment and privileged access to promo-
barriers to career mobility faced by women in tion while the latter benefits by retention of
hierarchical bureaucratic organizations, viz: firm-specific skills transferred to employees
• Societal stereotypes which sees women as through on-the-job training, and the facility
“properly in the home” rather than the to screen workers of differing ability through
workplace depict women as less committed observing job performance. Organizations
than men to jobs and careers. Such claims also benefit because the promise of a promo-
are used as justification to deny women tion at some time in the future elicits compli-
access to job ladders leading to the top. ance and provides incentives for employees to
• The tendency to locate low-skilled assembly retain organizational membership.
type operations, mainly staffed by women, Another problem for analysts of ILMs high-
in periphery functions removed from the lighted in research by Baron et al.[52] (corrob-
core firm, limits career opportunity for orating earlier work by Pfeffer and
women. Cohen[53]), is that organizations of the same
• The educational system prepares women size and operating within the same basic
for female-dominated jobs usually involv- industry ranged from having no formal pro-
ing short career ladders. motion system to extensive ILMs covering
• Women lose out because of the political most workers with many variants between
nature of the internal promotion system in these extremes.
hierarchical organizations. This article will confine itself to those
• Primary responsibility for home and chil- aspects of ILM arrangements which facilitate
dren affects the ability of women to relocate. and/or constrain career mobility and career
The lack of child-care facilities provided by development opportunities. Despite Baron et
work organizations is also a problem. al.’s [52] research, there is support for the
[ 35 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and view that formal ILMs are synonymous with division of labour leads to a political contest
Michael Coolahan large hierarchical type organizations and in organizations with different groups such
Career mobility in organiza- consistent with bureaucratic functional-line as occupational groups, trade unions, person-
tions: implications for career career ladders. Osterman[7] noted that there
development – Part I
nel specialists, striving to shape jobs to fur-
can be more than one ILM in an organization. ther their own interests.
Journal of European Industrial
He explains how craft, industrial (firm spe- Despite the importance of career systems
Training
20/4 [1996] 30–40 cific), and secondary employment systems for the individual and the organization, very
can exist in the same organization operating little is known about the dynamics of employ-
under different industrial relations rules, ment conditions within which firms define
providing different career opportunities for opportunities and equip people for job
diverse groups of workers. changes[21]. For example, the allocation of
cross-functional assignments to prepare
Job ladders individuals for upward mobility may owe
The notion that job ladders develop around more to political favouritism than any
work roles, having common technical skills objective assessment of an individual’s
or customs, is a recurring theme in the litera- potential[57].
ture. However, there is support for the view Equally other HRM policies in areas like
that many vertical and horizontal distinc- promotion, training, recruitment and the
tions among jobs reflect custom and status reward systems can have an impact on an
issues and not simply distinctions in skill and individual’s career attainment.
knowledge requirements.
Some ladders reach the top of the organiza- Promotions
tion, others have ceilings at fairly low levels. At the very basic level, an employee’s chance
Distribution of grades by job ladder can make of competing for a vacancy in a promotional
advancement difficult if there is a concentra- hierarchy is primarily dependent on that
tion of lower level grades at the bottom, i.e.
individual being aware than an opportunity
mini-pyramid.
exists, which is in turn somewhat dependent
Job ladders can be differentiated both verti-
on the existence or otherwise of company-
cally and horizontally with limited lateral
wide job posting arrangements.
movement. Kanter[54] identified three major
Lee[58,59] argues that the formality of the
sources of blocked mobility associated with
promotion process creates problems for both
ILMs:
promoter and promotee, i.e. difficulty in mea-
1 dead-end jobs with short ladders and lim-
suring a person’s attributes; job characteris-
ited opportunities for horizontal move-
tics are likewise hard to measure.
ment;
Rosenbaum[46] found that managers have
2 wrong route to a high-mobility job: inexpe-
insufficient information about employees’
rience inhibits further moves;
abilities and relied on certain “structural
3 the “Pyramid Squeeze”, smaller number of
jobs at the top. indicators” to signal ability such as:
• educational credentials are thought to con-
Another problem highlighted by Osterman[7] note ability;
is that rules and procedures within ILMs • supervisors’ ratings are unreliable because
considerably limit management discretion competing candidates are often in compara-
concerning deployment of the labour force. ble jobs;
This may be especially so where trade unions • individuals’ past education and job attain-
are recognized. This rigidity prevents ments are equated with ability;
employees from gaining experience through • employees are viewed as being more capa-
cross-functional lateral moves, thereby limit- ble if they have “rapidly advancing careers”
ing their upward potential. Kanter[54] also or if they are “younger” than their peers in
identified sources of career blockages in high- their status level.
tech firms, viz: functional overspecializa-
tion/high-level dead end jobs, high status Research by Fagenson[60] showed that the
early in the career and nowhere to go after- inability to secure a “mentor” can adversely
wards. DiPrete[55] found that employees on affect a person’s career chances. Lee and
the same job ladder and in the same division Piper[50] refer to the process of “labelling”,
as the vacancy were more likely than others where, within a short time of entering an
to get the job, even when the position was organization, an individual is attributed with
open to other ladders. Baron and Bielby[56] qualities, abilities and attitudes based on
argue that large organizations are more limited, irrelevant and subjective evidence.
likely to proliferate job titles, fostering both Such labelling, they argue, determines
vertical and horizontal distinctions within whether an employee becomes a “high flyer”,
similar occupations. They concluded that the “steady climber” or “slow mover”.
[ 36 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and Training and development Weaknesses in the organization’s career
Michael Coolahan Over time, the unavailability of training, or development system
Career mobility in organiza- the refusal by the individual to undertake Nicholson and Arnold[63] identified four
tions: implications for career typical shortcomings of organizational career
development – Part I training and development, can impede an
employee’s progress up or across job development systems:
Journal of European Industrial 1 Restricted career development: No organi-
Training ladders[42]. Inglos[61] found that “the selec-
20/4 [1996] 30–40 tion for and participation in training and zation can provide unlimited opportunities
development activities carries powerful sym- for staff mobility due to the pyramidal
nature of the organization. However, orga-
bolic messages within an organization.”
nizations create unnecessary restrictions
Equally, non-selection implies/signals a
by not making cross-functional promotions.
“dead end” career. Guntz[62] argues that an
2 Political career development: Organiza-
excess of training or over-specialization in tional politics can promote or impede an
one area may make it difficult for an individ- employee’s career, independent of perfor-
ual to change job ladders. mance levels.
3 Mechanistic career development: Bureau-
Selection criteria and methods cratic rules and procedures can lead to a
An employee’s mobility within an organiza- loss of motivation when the criteria for
tion may be restricted if there is a mismatch career advancement are adhered to rigidly.
between the abilities and attributes of the 4 Neglected career development: Individuals
individual and the requirements of the job. are left to take charge of their own develop-
Over-reliance on typically unreliable selec- ment; career paths are not identified and
tion devices like interviews and some person- advancement is ad hoc.
ality tests can facilitate this mismatch.
Arnold et al.[36] point out that the high Organizational technology
expectation of advancement of new recruits The type of organizational technology and
can lead to disillusionment, loss of motiva- the technological environment can signifi-
tion and intention to leave the organization. cantly influence an individual’s career oppor-
tunities. Fast-moving high-technology orga-
He advocates realistic job previews to
nizations may have no option but to “buy in”
describe jobs “warts and all” to overcome this
expertise. Such industries are typified by
problem.
short career ladders with limited opportunity
for hierarchical advancement. Kanter[12]
Extrinsic rewards found that high-technology companies pro-
Some employees may have the skills and vided “dual ladders”; technical employees
abilities to perform at a higher level but do advanced along a track supposedly in parallel
not value the reward highly enough. This with a managerial track.
phenomenon creates a blocked career path Another problem is the obsolescence of
for those coming up behind in the hierarchy. technical professions. Employees who have
failed to make it into general management
Internal competition may become surplus to requirement in the
A tournament model was proposed by Rosen- event of technological change. Guntz[62]
baum[4,5] to explain individual career mobil- makes the point that the lateral moves are
ity in “pyramid” shaped organizations. The possible when the technology is simple but
model suggests a dynamic series of contests difficult when the technology is complex. In
generated by organizational events. He this case vertical moves predominate.
argues that each competition differentiates a
group of employees, defining future opportu- Poor human resource planning
nities. Inaccurate human resource forecasting can
result in overstaffing. In this situation the
Early winners are seen as “high potential”
normal pyramid restrictions on upward
people who can do no wrong and receive chal-
mobility are exacerbated. External business
lenging assignments which prepares them for
conditions resulting in slow organizational
future success. Early losers on the other hand
growth can limit the number of opportunities
receive a “custodial socialization process” for increased responsibilities, and mobility
and their subsequent performance is largely prospects for staff are further limited if the
irrelevant and goes unnoticed. They may organization has to downsize in order to
compete, however, in subsequent secondary survive. Slocum[2] found that there were
tournaments. The costs of losing a contest is significantly fewer career opportunities in
“instant death” and this often discourages “defender” strategy companies than in
risk taking and innovation on the part of “analyser” strategy companies. Opportuni-
employees. ties for career advancement are also directly
[ 37 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and related to and reflect a firm’s size and organi- • Individual variables are important but do
Michael Coolahan zation’s life cycle position, i.e. growth, main- not fully explain the level of career mobility
Career mobility in organiza- tenance, decline and turnaround. which a particular individual may achieve.
tions: implications for career
Organizational characteristics act as mod-
development – Part I
Organizational restructuring erators of the relationship between individ-
Journal of European Industrial
Recent trends, such as restructuring or ratio- ual characteristics and mobility patterns.
Training
20/4 [1996] 30–40 nalization of companies, have constrained job • Careers tend to be perceived in traditional
mobility and career opportunities. The terms in many organizations. However,
decentralization of production, and the many of the organizational factors
migration of work towards periphery firms reviewed indicate a need to embrace other
where inferior labour markets exist, have notions of a career. This shift in emphasis
segmented the labour forces. This segmenta- will have significant implications for suc-
tion has precipitated a situation where cessor planning and career management
“worker mobility between tiers is increas- systems.
ingly constrained by a widening skill gap and
geographic separation”[8]. The implications for career development are
Cassell[8] comments that the outcome of many; however, four particular implications
this type of restructuring and the breaking are highlighted here:
up of organizational job ladders will be fewer 1 Career development and succession plan-
jobs at the higher end of the ladder and a ning cycles will need to relate more closely
decline in opportunities for future genera- to the changing business strategies and
tions of workers. developments in the structure of the organi-
zation than heretofore.
Multi-tasking 2 Planning career development must become
Apart from reducing the size of the labour more of a joint process involving both the
force, multi-tasking has two opposing effects individual and the organizational perspec-
on career mobility. On the one hand, it tive. The notion of a job/career for life or
increased opportunities for inter-firm career guaranteed promotion will have to be
mobility by reducing demarcation barriers. specifically addressed with a greater
However, the increased firm specificity and emphasis on widening the individual’s
the abandonment of external accreditation of perception of what constitutes a career.
skills will lead to reduced opportunities for This will require some education type ini-
inter-firm mobility. tiatives.
3 Later job opportunities will become
Growth in services increasingly relevant especially for older
One of the most significant structural age groups, when there is often an assump-
changes to affect career opportunity for work- tion that development stops. New forms of
ers is the decline in manufacturing and the work organization may facilitate this later
growth in services industries. Service indus- movement.
tries are typified by short career ladders and 4 The focus of training and individual devel-
are used to buffer core organizations, provid- opment will most likely be the job itself.
ing a flexible workforce which can be dis- Such training and development is likely to
pensed with in times of recession. occur early in the individual’s career and it
will help to ensure that the necessary com-
petences have been achieved early in the
Key lessons for career career and allow for greater flexibility in
development terms of career management and develop-
This paper has reviewed some of the litera- ment processes. It will also provide the
ture on career mobility and proposes that organization with greater flexibility when
career progression within organizations is planning lateral moves and upward mobil-
constrained by a combination of individual ity (if and when available).
and organizational factors. A number of Some of these issues will be addressed in part
important issues emerge which have implica- II of this paper which reports a case study on
tions for career development practices: career mobility and development in a multi-
• Organizations intentionally or otherwise disciplinary organization.
build-in barriers to career mobility. These
barriers may take many forms and may References
arise from major organizational changes 1 Garavan, T.N., “Promoting strategic career
and/or the types of human resource man- development activities: some Irish experi-
agement and development practices preva- ence”, Industrial and Commercial Training,
lent within the organization. Vol. 22 No. 6, 1990, pp. 22-30.

[ 38 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and 2 Slocum, W.L., “Occupational careers in organi- 17 Heuseman, R.C. and Hatfield, J.D., “Equity
Michael Coolahan sations: a sociological perspective”, Personnel theory and the managerial matrix”, Training
Career mobility in organiza- & Guidance Journal, Vol. 43, 1968, pp. 858-66. and Development Journal, April 1990, pp. 98-
tions: implications for career 3 Phillips, D.S., Pazienza, N.J. and Walsh, D.J., 102.
development – Part I 18 Birch, S. and Macmillan, B., “Managers on the
“Decision-making styles and progress in occu-
Journal of European Industrial pational decision making”, Journal of Voca- move: a study of British managerial mobility”,
Training Management Survey Report No. 7, British
tional Behaviour, Vol. 25, 1984, pp. 96-105.
20/4 [1996] 30–40 Institute of Management, 1971.
4 Rosenbaum, J.E., “Organization career sys-
tems and employee misperceptions”, in 19 Schein, E., Career Dynamics, Addison Wesley,
Arthur, M.B., Hall, D.T. and Lawrence, B.S. Reading, MA, 1978.
(Eds), Handbook of Career Theory, Cambridge 20 Creedy, J. and Whitfield, K., “Earnings and job
University Press, 1989, pp. 329-53. mobility over the life cycle: internal and exter-
nal processes”, International Journal of Man-
5 Rosenbaum, J.E. (1986), “Institutional career
power, Vol. 9 No. 2, 1988, p. 16-18.
structures and the social contribution of abil-
21 Sonnenfeld, J.A., “Career system profiles and
ity” in Richardson, J.E. (Ed.), Handbook of
strategic staffing”, in Arthur, M.B., Hall, D.T.
Theory and Research for the Sociology of Educa-
and Lawrence, B.S. (Eds), Handbook of Career
tion, Greenwood, New York, NY, 1986, pp. 139-
Theory, Cambridge University Press, UK, 1989,
72.
pp. 202-24.
6 Doeringer, P. and Piore, M., International
22 Schein, E.H. and Van Maanen, J., “Career
Labour Markets & Manpower Analysis, Heath
development”, in Hackman, J.R. and Sutte, J.L.
Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 1971. (Eds), Improving Life at Work, Goodyear, Santa
7 Osterman, P., “Introduction: the nature and Monica, CA, 1977.
importance of internal labour markets”, in 23 Leibowitz, F., Kaye, C. and Ferren, D., “Career
Osterman, P. (Ed.), Internal Labour Markets, gridlock”, Training and Development Journal,
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984, pp. 163-90. April 1990, pp. 29-35.
8 Cassell, F.H., “Changing industrial structure 24 Sonnenfeld, J. and Kotter, J.P., “The matura-
and job/career opportunity”, International tion of career theory”, Human Relations, Vol.
Journal of Manpower, Vol. 11 No. 1, 1990, 35 No. 1, 1982, pp. 19-46.
pp. 26-37. 25 Blau, P.M. and Meyer, M.W., Bureaucracy in
9 Spilerman, S., “Careers, labour market struc- Modern Society, Random House, New York, NY,
ture and socio-economic achievement”, 1971.
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 83, 1977, 26 Miller, D. and Form, A., cited in Sonnenfeld, J.
pp. 551-93. and Kotter, J.P., “The maturation of career
10 Wilensky, H.L., “Varieties of work experience”, theory”, Human Relations, Vol. 35 No. 1, 1982,
in Borow, H. (Ed.), Man in a World at Work, pp. 19-46.
Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, 1964. 27 Roberts, O.K., “The sociology of work entry
11 Hall, D.T., “Pressures from work, self & home and occupational choice”, in Wall, A.G., Super,
in the life stages of married women”, Journal D.E. and Kidd, J.M. (Eds), Career Development
of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 6, 1975, pp. 121-32. in Britain, Hobson’s Press, Cambridge, 1981.
12 Kanter, J., “Variations in managerial career 28 Hout, M., Following in Father’s Footsteps:
structures in high technology firms; the Social Mobility in Ireland, Harvard University
impact of organizational characteristics on Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989.
internal labour market patterns” in Osterman, 29 Blau, P.M. and Duncan, O.D., The American
Occupational Structure, Wiley, New York, NY,
P. (Ed.), Internal Labour Markets, MIT Press,
1967.
Cambridge, MA, 1984, pp. 109-32.
30 Sicherman, N. and Galor, O., “A theory of
13 Pfeffer, J., “A political perspective on careers:
career mobility”, Journal of Political Economy,
interests, networks and environments”, in
Vol. 98 No. 11, 1987, pp. 15-23.
Arthur, M.B., Hall, D.T. and Lawrence, B.S.
31 Breen, R., Hannon, D.F., Rottman, D.B. and
(Eds), Handbook of Career Theory, Cambridge
Whelan, C.W., Understanding Contemporary
University Press, UK, 1989, pp. 380-96.
Ireland: State, Class and Development in the
14 Carroll, G.R. and Mayer, K.U., “Job shift pat- Republic of Ireland, Gill and MacMillan,
terns in the Federal Republic of Germany: the Dublin, 1990.
effects of social class, industry sector and 32 Schein, E., “Individuals and careers”, Techni-
organizational size”, American Sociological cal Report 19, Office of Naval Research, Wash-
Review, Vol. 51, 1986, pp. 323-41. ington, DC, 1982.
15 Gattiker, U.L. and Larwood, L., “Predicators 33 Schein, E., Organisational Culture & Leader-
for manager’s career mobility, success and ship, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1986.
satisfaction”, Human Relations, Vol. 41 No. 8, 34 Derr Brooklyn, C. and Laurent, A., “The inter-
1988, pp. 569-91. nal and external career: a theoretical and
16 Kotter, J.P., cited in Gattiker, U.E. and Larwood, cross-cultural perspective”, in Arthur, M.B.,
L., “Predictors for manager’s career mobility, Hall, D.T. and Lawrence, B.S. (Eds), Handbook
success and satisfaction”, Human Relations, of Career Theory, Cambridge University Press,
Vol. 41 No. 8, 1988, pp. 569-91. UK, 1989, pp. 454-71.

[ 39 ]
Thomas N. Garavan and 35 Driver, M.J., “Career concepts – a new 50 Lee, R.A. and Piper, J., “The graduate promo-
Michael Coolahan approach to career research”, in Katz, M.R. tion process: understanding the soft side”,
Career mobility in organiza- (Ed.), Career Issues in Human Resource Man- Personnel Review, Vol. 18 No. 3, 1989, pp. 36-46.
tions: implications for career agement, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 51 Shapior, E.C., Haseltine, F.P. and Rowe, M.P.,
development – Part I 1982. “Moving up: role models, mentors and the
Journal of European Industrial 36 Arnold, J., Robertson, I.T. and Cooper, C.L., patron system”, Sloan Management Review,
Training Work Psychology: Understanding Human Vol. 19 No. 3, 1978, pp. 51-8.
20/4 [1996] 30–40
Behaviour in the Workplace, Pitman, London, 52 Baron, J.N., Davis-Blake, A. and Bielby, W.T.,
1995, pp. 265-80. “The structure of opportunity: how promotion
37 Holland, J.L., The Psychology of Vocational ladders vary within and among
Choice, Blasdell, Waltham, MA, 1966. organizations”, Administration Science Quar-
38 Osipow, S.H., Theories of Career Development, terly, Vol. 231, 1986, pp. 248-73.
3rd ed., Prentice Hall, New York, NY, 1983. 53 Pfeffer, J. and Cohen, Y., “Determinants of
39 Dalton, G.W. and Thompson, P.H., Novations: internal labour markets in organizations”,
Strategies for Career Management, Scott Fore- Administration Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, 1984,
seman, Glenview, IL,1986. pp. 550-72.
40 Forster, N.S., “Employee job mobility and 54 Kanter, R.M., “Careers and the wealth of
relocation”, Personnel Review, Vol. 19 No. 6, nation, a macro-perspective on the structure
1990, pp. 18-24. and implications of career forms”, in Arthur,
41 Forster, N.S., “A practical guide to the manage- M.B., Hall, D.T. and Lawrence, B.S. (Eds),
ment of job changes and relations”, Personnel Career Theory, Cambridge University Press,
Review, Vol. 19 No. 4, 1990. UK, 1989, pp. 506-28.
42 Feldman, D.C. and Weitz, B.A., “Career 55 DiPrete, T.A.,“Horizontal and vertical mobility
plateaux reconsidered”, Journal of Manage- in organizations”, Administrative Science
ment, Vol. 45 No. 1, 1988, pp. 69-80. Quarterly, Vol. 32, September 1987, pp. 422-44.
43 Hall, D.T. and Hall, S.H., cited in Garavan, T.N., 56 Baron, J.N. and Bielby, W.T., “The proliferation
“Promoting strategic career development of job titles in organizations”, Administrative
activities: some Irish experience”, Industrial Science Quarterly, Vol. 31, 1986, pp. 561-86.
and Commercial Training, Vol. 22 No. 6, 1990, 57 Argyris, C., cited in Arthur, M.B. and Dram,
pp. 27-30. K.E., “Reciprocity at work”, in Arthur, M.B.,
44 Hall, D.T. and Isabella, L.A., “Downward Hall, D.T. and Lawrence, B.S. (Eds), Handbook
career movement and career development”, of Career Theory, Cambridge University Press,
Organizational Dynamics, Summer 1987, UK, 1989, pp. 292-312.
pp. 5-22. 58 Lee, R., “The theory and practice of promotion
45 Sekeran, U. and Hall, D.T., “Asynchronism in processes: part one”, Leadership & Organiza-
dual career and family linkages”, in Arthur, tion Development Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, 1985,
M.B., Hall, D.T. and Lawrence, B.S. (Eds), pp. 3-6.
Handbook of Career Theory, Cambridge Uni- 59 Lee, R., “The theory and practice of promotion
versity Press, UK, 1989, pp. 159-80. processes: part two”, Leadership & Organiza-
46 Rosenbaum, J.E., Career Mobility in a Corpo- tion Development Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, 1985, pp.
rate Hierarchy, Academic Press, New York, NY, 17-21.
1987. 60 Fagenson, E.A., “The mentor advantage: per-
47 Ornstein, S., Cron, W.L. and Slocum, J.W. Jr, “A ceived career/job experiences of protégés
comparative test of the theories of Levinson versus non-protégés”, Journal of Organiza-
and Super”, Journal of Organizational Behav- tional Behaviour, Vol. 10, 1989, pp. 309-20.
iour, Vol. 10 No. 2, April 1989, pp. 117-33. 61 Inglos, C.A., “Management education: articu-
48 Gallos, J.V., “Exploring women’s development: lating the unspoken, riding the bend: wasting
implications for theory, practice and money & preparing for tomorrow?”, in May, L.,
research”, in Arthur, M.B., Hall, D.T. and Zamitt, S. and Moore, C.A. (Eds), Evaluating
Lawrence, B.S. (Eds), Handbook of Career Business & Industry Training, Kluwer, Nor-
Theory, Cambridge University Press, UK, 1989, wall, MA,1987.
pp. 110-32. 62 Guntz, H., “Careers and the corporate climb-
49 Martin, P.Y., Harrison, D. and Dinnitto, D., ing frame”, Leadership & Organizational
“Advancement for women in hierarchical Development Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, 1990,
organizations: a multilevel analysis of prob- pp. 17-24.
lems and prospects”, The Journal of Applied 63 Nicholson, N. and Arnold, J., “Graduate early
Behavioural Science, Vol. 19 No. 1, 1983, in a multi-national corporation”, Personnel
pp. 19-33. Review, Vol. 18 No. 4, 1989, pp. 3-14.

[ 40 ]