An application of work engagement in the job demands–resources model to career development: Assessing gender differences

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21310
• Date: 01 June 2018
• Author: Yunsoo Lee,SunHee J. Eissenstat
• Published date: 01 June 2018

QUANTITATIVE STUDY

An application of work engagement in the job

demands–resources model to career

development: Assessing gender differences

Yunsoo Lee

1

| SunHee J. Eissenstat

2

1

Department of Learning & Performance

Systems, Workforce Education and

Development, The Pennsylvania State

University, University Park, Pennsylvania

2

Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation,

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Scotch Plains, New Jersey

Correspondence

SunHee J. Eissenstat, Rutgers, The State

University of New Jersey, 1775 Raritan Rd.

Scotch Plains, NJ07076.

Email: jangsunhee1010@gmail.com

The purpose of this study is to investigate the applicability of the

job demands–resources (JD-R) model to work engagement and

career development based on the extended conceptual model pro-

posed by Lee, Kwon, Kim, and Cho (2016). This study also aims to

examine gender differences within this model. To achieve these

goals, this study adopts a multigroup analysis using a sample from

the Generations of Talent data set, which is composed of 1,997

employees in 11 countries. The results of the analysis show that

career identity and perceived supervisor support are positively

associated with work engagement, while work engagement is posi-

tively associated with career commitment and career satisfaction

across the study’s male and female groups. However, the effect of

career development opportunities on work engagement is not sig-

nificant, and there are no gender differences in the structural rela-

tionships among research variables. Given these results, this study

suggests implications for both researchers and practitioners.

KEYWORDS

career development, gender differences, work engagement

1|INTRODUCTION

Career development is one of the focal components of HRD (Swanson & Holton, 2001), and organizations offer

career development opportunities that take the forms of internal promotion, enhanced skills and competencies, and

professional development; in return, they expect certain performance-enhancing attitudes from their employees,

such as commitment (Tansky & Cohen, 2001). If one’s current job is consistent with one’s desired career development

path (good person–job fit), this may facilitate commitment and engagement, as the job itself is helpful for personal

career development. If this is not the case (poor person–job fit), one is more likely to explore other jobs (Briscoe,

Henagan, Burton, & Murphy, 2012). If this happens, one’s dedication to his or her current job also decreases

(Bakker & Leiter, 2010). This phenomenon can be best understood using the concepts of the protean career (Hall,

1996) and the boundaryless career (Arthur & Rousseau, 2001).

The protean career focuses on self-directed career development, and the boundaryless career concentrates

on career mobility transcending organizational boundaries. Protean careers and boundaryless careers emphasize

DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21310

Human Resource Dev Quarterly. 2018;29:143–161. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hrdq © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 143

the responsibility of an individual more than an organization in career development(Volmer & Spurk, 2011), so studies

on career development have also focused on individuals such as individual proactive career behavior (see Hirschi, Lee,

Porfeli,& Vondracek, 2013). However, those twoperspectives do not meanthat an organizationcan neglect career man-

agement for an employee because the partnership between individuals and organizations (Gilley, Eggland, & Gilley,

2002) andthe alignment of individualcareer planning and organizational careermanagement (McLagan,1989) are impor-

tant in career development. Therefore, a balanced career development study between employees andorganizations is

needed.

Lee, Kwon, Kim, and Cho (2016) have recently suggested a conceptual model of the relationship between

career and work engagement based on existing empirical studies. This model includes both the individual and orga-

nizational perspectives and explains employees’career development within organizations. This new model implies

that the job demands–resources (JD-R; Bakker & Demerouti, 2007) model can be extended to include career devel-

opment, with work engagement functioning as a mediating variable. The JD-R model focuses on work engagement

as a key variable that mediates the relationship between job and personal resources and employee performance.

Applying the assumption of the JD-R model to career development, Lee et al. (2016) have argued that the career-

related resources provided by organizations, including perceived career support and career development opportuni-

ties, promote employee work engagement, while work engagement improves career-related outcomes such as

career commitment and career satisfaction. Presently, the model focuses exclusively on individual studies’empirical

findings of the relationships between career-related variables and work engagement. It is thus necessary to verify

the proposed empirical model in its fullness.

When extending the JD-R model to include career development, researchers should recognize gender as an important

variable. As a cause of gender inequality in the workplace, many scholars pointed to dissimilar workplace experiences

(Lyness & Thompson, 2000) and career histories (Lyness & Thompson, 1997), gender role attitudes, and gender stereo-

types (Powell, Butterfield, & Parent, 2002). Studies have reported significant gender differences in recruitment, selection,

development opportunities, and organizational outcomes such as salary and promotion (Cleveland, Vescio, & Barnes-Far-

rell, 2005). Gati and Perez (2014), who analyzed gender differences in 31 aspects of career preference, reported that the

gender gap in 2010 was reduced in the overall aspects, but not yet eliminated, as compared to 1990. Until recently, ste-

reotypes have persisted among some employees and in some corporate cultures. For example, Smith, Caputi, and Critten-

den (2012) have identified some women’s belief in the existence of a corporate “glass ceiling,”empirically demonstrating

that such beliefs may negatively influence the women’s perceptions of their career success (e.g., career satisfaction, happi-

ness, emotional well-being, physical health, and work engagement). This suggests that women may experience discrimina-

tion in career development, which makes it difficult for them to achieve career success. This also implies that women are

unfairly treated within organizations and by supervisors. If such inequality is repeated in career development opportunities,

it will widen the gender achievement gap in individuals’working lives. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate whether

there are significant gender differences in career development opportunities and organizational supports.

In this regard, the first purpose of the present study is to empirically examine whether the JD-R model and

work engagement can be used to explain the career development of the employees within a company. The second

goal is to reveal whether there are gender differences. The theories supporting this study are the JD-R model

(Bakker, Demerouti, & Sanz-Vergel, 2014) and Lee et al.’(2016) conceptual model that extended the JD-R model to

the realm of career development. The results of this study are beneficial for HRD professionals who develop and

implement career development programs in order to improve employees’levels of work engagement; they likewise

offer a window on gender discrimination in career development.

2|LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter describes the relationship between work engagement and career-related variables.

144 LEE AND EISSENSTAT