Social capital
Social capital is multidimensional and refers to the benefits which members can obtain from their social structures and networks. Social capital occurs at both the individual and the organizational levels (Lin et al., 1981;
Portes, 1998). Bourdiu (1986) defined it as a network of relationships. It assists network members by providing valuable resources while they are involved in social activities, including the mutual exchange of information, knowledge, and resources, as well as help in seeking out opportunities. It allows the individual to gain the trust and support of other members.
Social capital can be identified by looking at networks and the various relationships within these networks. The level of social capital will vary according to the strength of the ties and frequency of formal and informal interactions (Davidsson & Honig, 2003). Nahapiet & Ghoshal (1998) have attempted to clarify its dimensions by looking at past studies. They identified three such dimensions, structural, relational, and cognitive. They also recognized that these three dimensions are highly interrelated. The connection patterns between people form the structural dimension - that is, who you come into contact with and how you do it. The most important facets in this dimensions are the network ties (weak tie/strong tie) between actors, network configuration (density, connectivity, and hierarchy), and appropriable organization – that is, the existence of networks that can be appropriated to several different functions. The relational dimension refers to the nature of personal relationships that people establish over the long term. In particular, it focuses on aspects that change behavior, such as respect and friendship. The key facets of this dimension are trust and trustworthiness, obligation and expectation, and identity and identification. The cognitive dimension encompasses the common values that people share, and involves systems of representation, interpretation and meaning.
The important facets in this dimension are shared language and codes, and narratives.
Granovetter (1973) claimed that, within a particular social clique, ties are frequent and involve intense feelings. These ties encompass diverse relationships
such as those with friends and coworkers. Weak ties form a connection to information and resources outside the social clique. Weak ties are loose relationships between individuals. These ties are useful in helping us obtain information that would otherwise be unavailable or costly to locate. Strong ties, on the other hand, ensure the reliable and consistent availability of resources (Davidsson & Honig, 2003).
Some scholars (Burt, 1998; Metz & Tharenou, 2001) consider the mentoring relationship to be a feature of social capital. Higgins & Kram (2001) and distinguish two forms, the traditional perspective and the developmental perspective. In the traditional perspective, the mentoring relationship refers to a senior employee who assists in the development of protégés. In general, the mentor provides career and psychosocial support. Such a relationship can help to improve the protégés career development, career progress, rate of promotion, and job satisfaction. As the career environment has changed, so the concept of mentor relationship has changed accordingly. The new mentoring relationship focuses not only on psychosocial career support, but also takes note of who provides such assistance and how it is provided. In the developmental network perspective, the mentor may not only be from inside an organization, but may also come from outside. The mentoring relationship is not limited to one mentor and one protégé.
It can also be multiple developers with one protégé. From the interactions provided by this new mentoring relationship, the mentors can also benefit. The mentors not only provide job-related support, but also focus on the protégés career and give related personal support.
Although various definitions of social capital have been proposed over the course of decades of research, a number of researchers have used the structural dimension as the operationalization of social capital. This study also defines social capital as a structural dimension and also considers the mentoring relationship to be one of its features.
Human capital
Human capital theory is based on the idea that as individuals accrue knowledge their cognitive abilities increase allowing them to be more productive and efficient (Schultz, 1959; Becker, 1964; Mincer, 1974). Not only formal education, but also non-formal education, such as training courses, as well as
experience and practical learning gained on the job, contributes to human capital (Davidsson & Honig, 2003). Some scholars regard human capital as autonomous knowing-how competencies. Such competencies make up the skills and knowledge, including tacit knowledge, that are required to perform one's work (Sullivan & Arthur, 2006).
Davidsson & Honig (2003) operationalized human capital in four aspects, that is years of education, years experience as a manager, years of work experience, and previous start-up experience.
Gerald et al. (2002) defined human capital as the knowledge, skill, ability, attitude and experience needed when accomplishing the task of an organization.
It also consists of the abilities to recruit and retain talent. Lin & Huang (2005) defined human capital as an investment, reliant mainly on company inputs, which forms a unique and valuable ability and skill, resulting in a competitive advantage. Sveiby (1997) describes human capital as the capabilities of skill, education, and experience under various situations. Edvinsson & Malon (1997) pointed out that employees and managers are the human capital of business.
Human capital may be measured at an individual, division, or organization level.
Sullivan (1999) noted that human capital consists of skill, ability, knowledge and know-how that are owned by employees and whose effectiveness depends on appropriate relocation by the organization. A summary of past research data on the operationalization of human capital is given in table 2.
To sum up, although scholars agree on the significance of human capital, there is a lack of consensus on its precise definition. However, most scholars agree that human capital is concerned with employees’ knowledge, skill, ability, attitude and experience, and that this can be measured at the individual, group and organization levels. This study adopts the dimension of human capital most commonly used by scholars, as presented above. In addition, since this study focuses on expatriate careers, culture IQ and language are also considered to be within the concept of human capital.
Social & human capital and career choice
Most recent research has been concerned with how social and human
capital affect career outcome (Aryee et al., 1994; Seibert & Liden, 2001; Eby et al., 2003; Ng et al., 2005; Sullivan & Arthur, 2006) and entrepreneur (Grimeno et al., 1997; Davidsson & Honig, 2003). Burt (1998) claimed that human capital enhance one’s ability while social capital provide opportunities.
Granovetter (1973) emphasizes the importance of sustaining an extended network of weak ties in order to acquire resources. Aldrich & Zimmer (1986) have shown that social capital enables individuals to come into contact with new and different ideas, and a wider world views. This provides support in the development of new potential idea or venture. Shane & Venkataraman (2000) state that individuals with higher level of human capital are likely to discover opportunities and be more inclined to see these as starting points for developing their own businesses.
According to DeFillippi & Arthur (1996), boundaryless careers are sustained by three sets of personal competencies: knowing-why (motivation and values), knowing-how (skills and experience), and knowing-whom (networks and reputation). They compare the difference in competency profiles between bounded and boundaryless careers. The main characteristics of a boundaryless career are that the individual is employer-independent, has flexible employment and work tasks, and operates in a non-hierarchic and emergent network. Carr et al. (2005) further noted that these conditions provide a basis for considering the competencies of global boundaryless careerists. Career migrants may choose to pursue international careers because their specific needs can be satisfied better in a foreign setting (knowing-why). They may also contribute labor market value through their technical and professional skills (knowing-how). Finally, they may exploit and develop work, family and cultural networks to connect with outside organizations so as to attain career goals (knowing-whom).
Sullivan & Arthur (2006) proposed that the greater level of personal competencies based on knowing-why, knowing-how, and knowing whom, the more opportunities there will be for psychological and physical mobility.
A survey of 212 global leaders and their supervisors conducted by Ang et al.
(2006) led the authors to cite international experience, workgroup diversity and cultural diversity as important influences on the political and cultural adaptation of global leaders. The study also suggested that future research could use cultural
IQ as a dimension of cultural adaptation.
As for the relationship between entrepreneurs and intellectual capital, Cooper & Dunkelberg (1986) found that entrepreneurs often start businesses related to their previous jobs. Davidsson & Honig (2003) explore the effects of social and human capital on the discovery and exploitation process of entrepreneurs. They show that previously invested human capital affect the choice of career, including the tendency toward entrepreneur. Many of the decisions made by entrepreneurs result from friendship associations commonly consisting of social capital based on weak ties. Strong ties may result in the more efficient use of resources. Results show that human capital affects the discovery process of entrepreneurs. Their sample of Swedish nascent entrepreneurs are better education, have more work and start-up experience than the general population. Furthermore, those individuals who have a higher level of strong ties are more likely to start a business enterprise. However, where weak ties are more evident, human capital is less important. Human capital facilitates the discovery process of entrepreneurs, but this will only lead to a successful career within the context of an appropriate social structure.
Fugate et al. (2004) state that the ability to identify and recognize career opportunities is significantly influenced by one's social capital. Higgins & Kram (2001) developed four types of development networks based on two core dimensions, developmental network diversity and developmental relationship strength. Receptive development networks are those with low strength (weak ties) and low diversity. Traditional development networks have high strength (strong ties) and low diversity. Opportunistic development networks are those with high diversity and low strength. Entrepreneurial development networks have high strength and high diversity. Higgins & Kram (2001) further proposed that people with entrepreneurial development networks, namely those with strong ties and a high diversity network, will have more opportunities to experience career change.
Receiving career support from a variety of mentors should help the protégé to acquire information and resources, as well as access a variety of career opportunities (Burt, 1992).
Kanfer et al. (2001) conducted meta-analysis to investigate a number of individual difference factors that influence job search behavior and outcome.
They identified six types of factors - big five personality, locus of control and
optimism, self-esteem and job search self-efficacy, motives, social context, and biographical variables. These non-ability individual differences influence both job search behavior and outcome. Fugate et al. (2004) refer to employability as an aggregate function of career identity, personal adaptability (personality), social and human capital. They also contend that employability is an important influence on job choice.
Fish & Wood (1997) observed that there has been little research on the issue of cross cultural management in individual development responsibilities.
Companies are keen to know how the experience gained from international assignments can best be integrated into the continuing career development of their international managers (Hendry, 1994). Several researchers (Burack, 1988;
Black et al., 1992; Feldman & Tompson, 1993) have pointed out that experience helps expatriates to understand how their long-term career interests are served by having a variety of functions within a variety of cultural settings. This is both subjective and objective, including elements such as values, attitudes and career beliefs as well as career experience and roles.
As can be seen from the above, most studies agree that both human and social capital can help an individual to find career opportunities. Moreover, people will seek career opportunities that take advantage of their human and social capital. Therefore, human capital and social capital provide a basis on which to make a career choice. Although much work has been done on examining the effects of human and social capital on career success, few studies have investigated how they affect career choice. Thus, we hypothesize the following:
H1: The initial social capital of expatriates (external network, internal network, mentoring relationship) will influence the choice of career.
H2: The initial human capital of expatriates (international experience, language, education, work experience, managerial experience, personality, culture IQ) will influence the choice of career.
Calling recognition
Calling refers to the situation where an individual perceives work as more than simply a job or a career, but as the main purpose in his life. Although
usually associated with religious beliefs, callings do not necessarily require these.
Calling is a highly individualistic and subjective perception of one's career activities. When the individual perceive work as more than a job or a career, it can be considered a calling. (Hall & Chandler, 2005). Novak (1996) identified four characteristics. Firstly, an individual's calling is unique. Secondly, a calling requires certain preconditions, such as ability and love of one's job. Thirdly, a calling brings vitality and pleasure to one's work. And finally, finding a calling is difficult. Weiss et al. (2003) define a calling as knowing the right way for oneself, involving a process of introspection as a means of reaching a career goal. Hall &
Chandler (2005) see it as being similar to a dream - an ideal career. At first a calling develops as a result of ‘knowing why’ investments－an understanding of oneself and one's needs. Later, ‘knowing how’ and ‘knowing whom’ investments become more influential.
Value and fulfillment are two sought-after features in modern life. A calling offers a useful way to satisfy the need for value, and can also provide fulfillment by utilizing an individual's special talent or quality (Baumeister, 1991).
Although Hall looked at the idea of calling, few studies have measured its components. From a more generalized viewpoint, career identity and work orientation are similar to the concept of calling. Career identity refers to way an individual defines himself in his career. It provides motivation and direction, so that one can adapt and take advantage of appropriate opportunities (Ashforth &
Fugate, 2001).
Bellah et al. (1996) refer to calling as work orientation. Wrzesniewski (1997) proposed the tripartite set of Job-Career-Calling. People with a job orientation focus mainly on the financial rewards they receive for working, rather than on pleasure or fulfillment.
People with a career orientation have a more significant personal investment in their work. Money is only one sign of achievement, and promotion within an organization is also important. Wrzesniewski (2002) observed that those who see their job as their career seek to maximize their income, social status, power and prestige.
People with a calling orientation are looking for fulfillment from their work.
Work is not simply a way of gaining income and advancement, but an essential part of life. They often feel that they can improve society through their efforts.
(Dutton et al., 2000).
Calling recognition vs. career choice
Wrzesniewski et al. (1997) found that individuals with a calling orientation experienced the highest life and job satisfaction, and also absence from work less often. Work orientation is connected with how people do their work (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001), the goals they pursue when searching for a job, and the type and status of their new job (Wrzesniewski, 2002).
Hall & Chandler (2005) have proposed a calling model of psychological success. This model suggests that when an individual recognizes his career as a calling, he develops a clear sense of purpose and focuses all necessary effort to reach his goals and achieve that purpose. Dix & Savickas (1995) state that goal setting is a significant factor in re-establishing one’s career choice at various stages. Defillippi & Arthur (1996) indicate that a career identity which is independent of the employer creates boundaryless careers. An individual whose career is closely tied to his current employer may neglect external opportunities therefore not fully exploit his know-how or network. Sullivan & Arthur (2006) proposed that an individual’s motivation and value affect the opportunities for psychological and physical mobility. Further research is required to look at the conditions which give rise to callings, and to examine whether the source of the calling affects an individual's experience of psychological success (Hall &
Chandler, 2005).
As mentioned earlier, little work has been done on the long-term international careers of expatriates. Foster (2000) reports that only 13% of UK expatriates would accept a new assignment in the future. In contrast, 96.5% of Japanese expatriates (The Japan Institute of Labour) and 91% of Finnish expatriates (Riusala & Suutari, 2000) would be willing to accept another international assignment after repatriation. Few studies have looked at which factors might influence such careers, but Suutari (2003) observed that an expatriate’s internal motivation is a critical factor.
A number of studies (Gomez-Mejia & Balkin, 1987; Gregersen & Black, 1996; Harvey, 1989) have shown that repatriates often end up with low levels of
authority and face inefficient utilization of their competencies, as well as insufficient challenges. About one quarter of US expatriates decide to leave their organization after repatriation (Black & Gregersen, 1999). One important reason is that the home country failed to adequately value their international competencies. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that experienced international managers find it easy to make career moves due to the favorable external job market.
As discussed above, scholars use various terms (work orientation, calling, goal setting, career identity, motivation) to point out that an individual's main pursuit in life will affect his career choice. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: The calling recognition of expatriates will influence the choice of career.
Internal/external job opportunities vs. career choice
Eby et al. (2003) define internal marketability as the belief that one is valuable to one's present employer while external marketability is the belief that one is valuable to other employers. Kanter (1989) regards employability as an individuals increased value of internal and eternal labor markets.
According to the turnover theory, once an individual has identified available opportunities, he then proceeds to weigh up the possible outcomes of his current job against the possible outcomes of the alternatives. By analyzing the likelihood of obtaining and being successful in a new position, the individual can calculate the probability of these outcomes coming true. Depending on how attainable these outcomes are, the individual might then choose to change his career, change his job, or stay in the same position. If an alternative job offers an attractive outcome that can't be found by movement into a similar job, the individual will choose career change (Rhodes & Doering, 1983).
Steel (1996) survey 402 U.S. military service members and found that leavers were more likely to be actively exploring the labor market opportunities than stayers. Steel (2002) proposed the dynamic model of turnover decision. The model states that when individuals perceive there is little internal opportunity (advancement opportunity), they began passive scanning of external job market.
Individuals then receive feedback from the job market on their employability.
Negative feedback result in a downward adjustment of employment expectations, and it may also lead to reassessment of status quo. Positive feedback, on the contrary, may lead to individuals deciding to quit their job. Regardless of final result, job market feedback(internal/external market opportunities) give employees a better idea of what their employment prospects are.
Negative feedback result in a downward adjustment of employment expectations, and it may also lead to reassessment of status quo. Positive feedback, on the contrary, may lead to individuals deciding to quit their job. Regardless of final result, job market feedback(internal/external market opportunities) give employees a better idea of what their employment prospects are.