Employability: A psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications

Abstract

We examine the idea that an individual’s employability subsumes a host of person-centered constructs needed to deal effectively with the career-related changes occurring in today’s economy. We argue that employability represents a form of work specific (pro)active adaptability that consists of three dimensions—career identity, personal adaptability, and social and human capital. Reciprocal relationships among these dimensions are also discussed. The impact of employability on organizational behavior is illustrated through applications to the research literatures on job loss and job search.

Introduction

We are becoming fluid and many-sided. Without quite realizing it, we have been evolving a sense of self, appropriate to the restlessness and flux of our time. This mode of being differs radically from that of the past…We feel ourselves buffeted about by unmanageable historical forces and social uncertainties…our behavior tends to be ad hoc, more or less decided upon as we go along…But rather than collapse under these threats and pulls, the self turns out to be surprisingly resilient…We find ourselves evolving a self of many possibilities (Lifton, 1993, p. 1).

Alluding to the Greek god of many forms, Proteus, the above excerpt describes the protean self (Lifton, 1993). In essence, the ever-growing dynamism of the world today requires individuals to be increasingly fluid and adaptable. This is particularly true of the rapidly changing career landscape, prompting Hall, 1986, Hall, 1996, Hall, 2002, Hall and Mirvis, 1995 to write of the “protean worker.” More specifically, Hall and his colleagues contend that to be successful within today’s work environment, workers need to be highly adaptable, and manage multiple identities (Hall, 1976, Hall, 2002; Hall & Mirvis, 1995; Mirvis & Hall, 1994).

Traditionally, careers occurred within the context of a single or limited number of organizations (i.e., the bounded or organizational career)—as was the case under the old, paternalistic employer–employee contract (e.g., Hall & Mirvis, 1995). Currently, however, people more commonly experience largely self-managed, boundaryless careers comprised of many positions with multiple organizations and even industries (Arthur, 1994; Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Hall, 2002; Leana & Rousseau, 2000; Mirvis & Hall, 1994). Due to the increased pace of change, the boundaries between jobs, between organizations, and between life roles (e.g., parent, leisure) are becoming blurred, and individuals are required to negotiate a far greater number and variety of role transitions (Ashforth, 2001). For instance, despite the record economic expansion in the United States during the 1990s, corporate decks were shuffled and reshuffled, resulting in persistent and substantial waves of job loss. The extreme career and psychological impact on displaced workers highlighted the need for effective coping (Kinicki, Prussia, & McKee-Ryan, 2000). Further, the persistent restructuring precipitated challenges for survivors as well: they had to deal with the loss of valued coworkers, the responsibilities that were shouldered by those coworkers, and threats to their own job “security” (cf. Kammeyer-Mueller, Liao, & Arvey, 2001).

Survival in this turbulent career environment requires workers to continually manage change—in themselves and their contexts. Thus, a person’s ability and willingness to adapt is essential to career success (Hall, 2002; Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, & Plamondon, 2000). Historically, organizational scholars characterized employee adaptation as reactive, that is, as a response to environmental change. More recently, employees have been characterized as more proactive, as initiating change. For example, numerous person-centered constructs—proactive behaviors (Crant, 2000), personal initiative (Frese & Fay, 2001), proactive personality (Bateman & Crant, 1993), taking charge (Morrison & Phelps, 1999), proactive socialization (Saks & Ashforth, 1997), and so on—conceive of employees as active agents who initiate improvement in their work situations. Building on this theme, the purpose of this paper is to introduce the construct of employability.

We propose that an individual’s employability subsumes a host of person-centered constructs that combine synergistically to help workers effectively adapt to the myriad of work-related changes occurring in today’s economy. Employability is a psycho-social construct that embodies individual characteristics that foster adaptive cognition, behavior, and affect, and enhance the individual-work interface. This person-centered emphasis coincides with the major shift in responsibility for career management and development from employers to employees (e.g., Hall & Mirvis, 1995). In short, the onus is on employees to acquire the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) valued by current and prospective employers. Accordingly, the component dimensions comprising the construct of employability predispose individuals to improve their situations (pro)actively (cf. Seibert, Kraimer, & Crant, 2001) and to be malleable over time—“changeable”—in order to meet the demands of the environment (Chan, 2000).

Although the term employability has been used in various streams of literature—public policy and employment (Kossek, Huber, & Lemer, 2003), vocational counseling for disabled persons (Bricuit & Bentley, 2000), and economics (Lefresne, 1999)—surprisingly little research explicates its foundation or discusses its role in influencing a host of organizational behaviors. We begin by expanding on our definition of employability and discussing its theoretical foundations. The three component dimensions of employability—career identity, personal adaptability, and social and human capital—are presented next. We then examine relations between these component dimensions and employability and among the dimensions themselves, focusing on the role of reciprocal determinism. We also compare and contrast employability with several related individual difference variables in order to place the construct within a nomological network of person-centered variables. The final section illustrates the relevance of employability to organizational behavior, as we discuss the implications of employability for employees in transition—coping with job loss and engaging in job search.