Different Types of Protean Career Attitude, Task Performance and Contextual Performance: Based on Briscoe and Hall's Model

全文

(1)Different Types of Protean Career Attitude, Task Performance and Contextual Performance: Based on Briscoe and Hall’s Model. by Enkhbayar Tumurbaatar. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Major: International Human Resource Development. Advisor: Yi-Chun Lin, Ph.D.. National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan August 2017.

(2)

(3) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First of all, I would like to thank Taiwan ICDF and International Human Resource Development Program of National Taiwan Normal University for giving me this wonderful opportunity to expand myself in many different ways. Studying and living in Taiwan was one of the greatest experiences of my life. Secondly, my sincere thanks go to my dear advisor Dr. Lin, my teammates (Delsie, TA, Anna, Fan, ShangLin) and all of the faculty members of IHRD for your support. Also, thank you very much Jessie, Victor and Jessica (Kate and Tracy) for all your help with academic and personal problems during these two years. Additionally, I would like to express my appreciation to my “more than friends” friends Ilze, Delsie, Karina, TA, Marcela, Fernando and my other friends for a company. Love you guys, we have made a lot of unforgettable memories together. Lastly, my biggest appreciation goes to my family for always believing and supporting me on everything. Love you and miss you so much. Тайваньд суралцах боломж олгосон Тайвань ICDF-д маш их баярлалаа. Үргэлж туслаж, үнэтэй зөвлөгөөгөө өгч байсан удирдагч багш Др. Лин болон багийнхандаа, нийт багш нар болон хөтөлбөрийн менежер Жесси, Виктор, Кэйт, Трэси, туслах ажилтан Жессика нарт талархсанаа илэрхийлье. Миний удирдагч багш биш ч гэсэн үргэлж халуун дулаан, гэр бүл шиг мэдрэмж төрүүлж, үлгэр дуурайл болж байдаг багш Др.Лай болон Др.Жан нарт болон энд уулзсан бүх хүмүүст, хамгийн ойрын найзууд болох ICDF-ийн найзууддаа, Монголчууддаа, мөн луун завины багийнхан, бусад найзууддаа баярлалаа. Та бүхэнгүйгээр миний Тайвань дахь амьдрал ийм хөгжилтэй байхгүй байх байсан. Мөн урам зориг авах, шинийг сурч мэдэх, ойлгож ухаарах боломж олгодогт талархаж байна. Хамгийн сүүлд нь Монголд байгаа гэр бүлийнхэндээ болон найз Урангоодоо баярлалаа. Үргэлж надад итгэж, миний төлөө байдагт баярладаг шүү. Хайртай. Thanks again with millions of love, Enka.

(4) ABSTRACT Global market change and become more competitive. Recent studies showed that modern careers expected to use adaptive, proactive and self-managed approaches to deal with uncertain environment (Waters, Briscoe, Hall, & Wang, 2014). Therefore, protean career attitude is important for employees to survive this challenging work environment. People with protean career attitude do not bond their careers to an organization (Waters et al., 2014). They experience superior responsibility for their career selection and opportunities, and value their own freedom, growth and development as a success (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among the types of protean career attitude, and task and contextual performance. A further subsidiary aim was to investigate the “Protean” type of protean career attitude and its task and contextual performance comparing with the other three types of protean career attitude Dependent, Rigid and Reactive. Using a quantitative approach, online and paper-based questionnaires were conducted and collected in this study. The sample was 302 employees from Mongolia. IBM SPSS 23, and SPSS AMOS 23 were used for data analysis. The result of this study show that the “Dependent” and “Protean” types of protean career attitude have significant, positive correlation with task and contextual performance. The results also showed that “Protean” type has significantly higher task performance and significantly higher contextual performance than Dependent and Rigid types, but not significantly higher than Reactive type. Keywords: types of protean career attitude, task performance, contextual performance. I.

(5) TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...........................................................................................................I TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................II LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................IV LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................VI CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ......................................................................1 Introduction ........................................................................................................1 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................3 Purposes of the Study.........................................................................................4 Research Questions ............................................................................................4 Definition of the Terms ......................................................................................4. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................7 Protean Career Attitude......................................................................................7 Task and Contextual Performance .....................................................................9 Types of Protean Career Attitude, Task Performance and Contextual Performance .......................................................................................................10. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ..................................................................13 Research Framework .........................................................................................13 Hypothesis..........................................................................................................14 Sample................................................................................................................14 Data Collection ..................................................................................................14 Questionnaire Design .........................................................................................15 Measurements ....................................................................................................15 Control Variables ...............................................................................................18 Data Analysis .....................................................................................................18 Pilot Test ............................................................................................................25. CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND FINDINGS ...............................................27 Descriptive Statistics ..........................................................................................27 Correlation and Reliability Analysis ..................................................................29 Confirmatory Factor Analysis............................................................................32 ANCOVA ..........................................................................................................33 II.

(6) CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .................................37 Types of Protean Career Attitude, Task and Contextual Performance ..............37 Implication for Research ....................................................................................38 Implication for Practice......................................................................................38 Limitation of the Study ......................................................................................39 Future Research Suggestions .............................................................................39. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................41. III.

(7) LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1. Difference between Traditional Career and Protean Career. .................... 7 Table 2.2. Types of Protean Career Attitude. ............................................................ 9 Table 3.1. Protean Career Attitude Scale. .................................................................. 16 Table 3.2. Job Performance Scale .............................................................................. 17 Table 3.3. Protean Career Attitude Model Fit Summary ........................................... 19 Table 3.4. Task Performance Model Fit Summary .................................................... 21 Table 3.5. Contextual Performance Model Fit Summary .......................................... 23 Table 3.6. Descriptive Statistics for Pilot Test .......................................................... 24 Table 3.7. Cronbach’s Alpha for Pilot Test. .............................................................. 26 Table 4.1. Descriptive Statistics................................................................................. 28 Table 4.2. Mean, Standard Deviation, Correlation and Reliability ........................... 30 Table 4.3. Correlation between Protean Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance.............................................................................................. 30 Table 4.4. Correlation between Reactive Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance.............................................................................................. 31 Table 4.5. Correlation between Rigid Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance.............................................................................................. 31 Table 4.6. Correlation between Dependent Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance.............................................................................................. 32 Table 4.7. Result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis ................................................... 33 Table 4.8. Numbers of Each Type of Protean Career Attitude. ................................. 33 Table 4.9. Comparison of Protean Types with Other Types on Task and Contextual Performance.............................................................................................. 34 Table 4.10. Hypothesis Testing Results Summary .................................................... 35. IV.

(8) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1. Research framework ................................................................................ 13 Figure 3.2. Protean career attitude CFA measurement model ................................... 20 Figure 3.3. Task performance CFA measurement model .......................................... 22 Figure 3.4. Contextual performance CFA measurement model ................................ 23. V.

(9) CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter will provide background information of the study, the statement of the problem, research purpose and research questions.. Introduction Globalization and technological revolutions especially digital revolution drives work transformation today (United Nations Human Development Report, 2016). In addition, according to the World Economic Forum (2016), business models are changing due to major drivers of transformation, which are technological growth, socio-economic, and geographical developments. This transformation affects industries and impacts jobs and job formulation and displacements. It also requires high labor productivity and skill development in the workforce. The biggest challenge of the organizations is how to keep their business sustainable and how to run their business successfully in the competitive and dynamic market. In order to decrease cost and increase efficiency, organizations are downsizing, and restructuring their workforce (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). The organizational structure and workplace is continuously changing and this vibrant labor market affects people’s career and its development. Career researches conducted in the last 20 years showed that modern careers expect to use adaptive, proactive and self-managed approaches to deal with this uncertain environment (Waters, Briscoe, Hall, & Wang, 2014). The uncertainty of job security makes employees take charge of their own career path and career development. Because of this, “new career” (protean career attitude and boundary less career) is becoming a popular concept in career development. Mongolia is a small country with a population of 3 million and a vast amount of natural resources. It is becoming an important destination for foreign direct investment. Mongolia has experienced dramatic economic growth in the 2000’s. Mongolia has had real per capita gross domestic product (GDP) averaging yearly increases of 6.7% from 2000 to 2013. Growth of 15.8% from 2010 to 2011 and 10.6% from 2011 to 2012 was especially high, with only one economy growing faster in 2011 and two growing faster in 2012. Mongolian GDP in 2013 was 12.582 billion, but has now decreased to 11.16 billion in 2016 (World Bank, 2015). The US Department of State, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs (2016) described Mongolia as Mongolia’s tremendous mineral reserves, agricultural endowments, and proximity to the vast Asia market make it an attractive foreign direct investment (FDI) destination in the 1.

(10) medium to long term. However, depressed global commodities markets, limited infrastructure, and the Government of Mongolia's (GOM) love-hate-love track record with regard to foreign investors and FDI in recent years make caution advisable in the short term (p.1) on Investment Climate Statements. The economic growth of Mongolia is not sustainable and the political condition is not stable. Because of this vibrant economic and political environment, many companies are unsustainable and sometimes they have to close factories and companies and employees may experience labor shortages for short and long periods of time. In the public sector, employees are more likely to change their jobs every 2 to 4 years because when parliament changes public servants change too. It is not illegal but in the reality, public servants lose their jobs based on which party wins the election or leads the government. Economic and political issues make jobs insecure in Mongolia (Research Center of Mongolian Parliament, 2012). In order to survive this unsustainable working environment, Mongolians should develop and manage their careers by themselves. Hall (2004) explained that people need to be protean, because all of the businesses today need more honest and effective audits. Also employees need “personal audits” that is, employees need to have a strong internal “compass” (own value) to follow in today’s “ethically challenged business environment”. Empowering employees to be able to follow their own values, develop themselves to take charge of their own career, and using their full potential is the way to grow, accomplish and contribute more to the society. Individuals who have protean career attitude do not bond their careers to the organization (Waters et al., 2014), experience superior responsibility for their career selection and opportunities and value own freedom, growth and development as a success (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). Protean career attitude is more important for employees for surviving this challenging and competitive labor market. Chin and Rasdi (2014) suggested that human resource practitioners help individuals and organizations to develop protean career management. Career development is one of the key functions of the human resource management which has great influence on organization success. According to the Yahya and Othman (2004), an effective career development system is the fifth most important factor for company effectiveness, and it is essential for the companies to retain their talented employees. Besides, many studies showed that career development system can increase employee performance and increase positive attitudes in the work place, as well as grow loyalty of the employees. 2.

(11) Therefore, understanding and studying more on career development and career development attitude of the employees and individuals are eminent in human resource development and management.. Statement of the Problem There are many research focusing on protean career attitude and its relationship with other variables such as employability, organizational commitment and career success. Previous studies show that protean career is significantly correlated to career success, job satisfaction, career satisfaction, as well as promotion and salary (Waters et al., 2014). Constructs of protean career attitude are its two dimensions (self-directed and value driven) which helps ones to understand and know their career, value the want to follow in their life and feel fulfillment in their career (Briscoe, 2015). These types are based on lower and higher level of self-directed and value-driven protean career attitude and its combination. Protean attitude makes employees able to manage their career sustainable, using skills on selfexploration and awareness, values awareness and expression adaptability and learning, as well as relationships. This skill is essential for employees to make successful transition or development on their career related issues (Briscoe, 2015) especially in this VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity) environment (Shaffer & Zalewski, 2011). The types of protean career attitude generally describe career self-development styles of individuals. Understanding how people develop their career, its style and protean types are essential for career counsellors and HR practitioners to help them develop their career successfully and increase their benefits (Briscoe, 2015). But there is very little attention focused on Briscoe and Hall’s model (2006) on the four types of protean career attitude. This study tried to understand types of protean career attitude and its relationship between task and contextual performance to contribute both literature and practice, especially in developing country with unstable economy.. 3.

(12) Purposes of the Study The relationship between protean career attitude types and task and contextual performance in employees in Mongolia has not been studied before. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between the four types of protean career attitude, and task and contextual performance. A further subsidiary aim is to compare task and contextual performance of “Protean” type with “Dependent”, “Rigid” and “Reactive” types in Mongolia.. Research Questions According to the purpose of study, the following research questions are developed. 1. Do types of Protean Career Attitude significantly correlate to task performance? 2. Do types of Protean Career Attitude significantly correlate to contextual performance? 3. Does “Protean” type has higher task performance than the other three (Dependent, Rigid and Reactive) types? 4. Does “Protean” type has higher contextual performance than the other three (Dependent, Rigid and Reactive) types?. Definition of the Terms Protean Career Attitude Protean career attitude is self and value driven career management. People who have protean career attitude follow their own values and personal goals to build their career instead of relying on the organization (Briscoe, Hall, & DeMuth, 2006).. Dependent This describes individuals who do not follow their own principles and manage their career development. Also they do not have self-directed and value-driven protean career attitude.. Rigid This describes individuals who have value-driven protean career attitude but not have self-directed career management.. Reactive 4.

(13) This describes individuals who do manage their career development, but do not follow their internal values as guidance (Segers, Inceoglu, Vloeberghs, Bartram, & Henderickx, 2008).. Protean This describes individuals who have value-driven, self-directed protean career attitude, follow their own values and manage their career based on their needs (Segers et al., 2008).. Task performance Task performance is in–role performance which requires desired results, products and behavior by job description to reach organizational goals (Bakker, Demerouti, & Brummelhuis, 2012).. Contextual performance Contextual performance is organizational citizenship behaviors which contribute to organization effectiveness by providing positive environment and are not connected to task expectations.. 5.

(14) 6.

(15) CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter introduces the review of related literature on protean career attitude, four types of protean career attitude, task performance and contextual performance. Also, linkage between variables was presented.. Protean Career Attitude In ancient Greek mythology, one of the characters of Homer’s Odyssey is Proteus. Proteus is “Man of the sea” (Wikipedia, 2016) who can change his shape easily based on the situation. The adjective “protean” comes from Proteus, which means ability to change, flexibility and adaptability (Inkson, 2006). “Protean career” was firstly mentioned and used in Hall’s and his colleague’s books and papers from 1976 as “accomplishing own career success among self-managed vocational behavior” which prefers personal values than organization rewards. In addition, the success criteria of protean career attitude are psychological success and well-being instead of objective success such as salary and status” (Patton & McMahon, 2006). The Table 2.1. shows difference between traditional and protean career (Hall, 2006). Table 2.1. Difference Between Traditional Career and Protean Career Issue. Protean career. Traditional career. Who’s in charge?. Person. Organization. Core values. Freedom growth. Advancement. Degree of mobility. High. Lower. Success criteria. Psychological success. Position level Salary. Key attitudes. Work satisfaction professional commitment. Organizational commitment. In traditional careers, the organization takes responsibility for employee’s career development and core values are improvement of the organization. For protean career, the employee is responsible for all of his/her career development and core values are personal growth and development. Mobility is low for traditional careers and high for protean careers. Success criteria is objective (promotion, income, status) for traditional careers, but psychological (satisfaction and psychological well-being) for protean careers (Hall, 2004). Protean career attitude is self and value driven career management. People who have protean career attitude follow their own value, personal goal and dream to build their career 7.

(16) instead of relying on the organization (Briscoe et al., 2006). In other words, people who have protean career attitude define and direct their own career path (De Vos & Soens, 2008). Personal values guide protean individuals in their career development and decisions, and selfdirect management of careers, implying the ability to adapt in a new environment by learning new skills and modifying performance levels. Protean talents control their own career and are able to expect and plan their own career paths (Cerdina & Pargneux, 2014). Protean career attitude has two dimensions. These are value-driven and self-directed career management. Briscoe and Hall (2006) stated that value-driven is when an individual follows her or his own personal values to decide and guide her or his career development, and self-directed career management is when an individual makes a career decision based on performance and learning demands. On the other hand, value-driven protean talents chase successful careers directed by internal values, motives and must dos to reach their dreams. Self-directed refers to learning and development opportunities to develop their skills and competencies (Lin, 2015). Also, protean talents put their values first. They do not bond their careers to the organization (Waters et al., 2014). Briscoe and Hall (2006) categorized 4 types of protean attitudes based on higher or lower and weaker or stronger dimensions of protean career attitude. The four types are dependent, rigid, reactive, and protean. The person who is not value driven, and not selfdirected is defined as “dependent”. Dependent people do not manage their career on their own. They depend on other things to manage their careers such as organizations. The person who is self-directed, but not value driven would be “reactive”. Reactive people do not have a viewpoint to control their career. The person who is value driven, but not self-directed is “rigid”. Rigid people can’t adjust their performance and learning needs, not being able to build their career. The person, who is value driven, and self-directed is considered as “protean”. They know what they want and they can manage their own career based on their values and needs (Briscoe & Hall, 2006). Table 2.2. shows Briscoe and Hall’s model on types of protean career attitude.. 8.

(17) Table 2.2. Types of Protean Career Attitude Dependent. Rigid. Reactive. Protean. Values driven. No. Yes. No. Yes. Self-directed. No. No. Yes. Yes. Task and contextual performance Thorndike (1913) defined job performance as a measurement for individuals which calculates whether outcomes matches goals. Also, Hall and Goodale (1986) stated that job performance is also how employees accomplish theirs tasks by spending their time, using resources and cooperating with others. But overall job performance of employees depends on a many behavioral factors. Yang and Hwang (2014) noted that job performance signifies quality, quantity, and effectiveness of the work. Borman and Motowidlo (1997) divided job performance into two categories which is task performance and contextual performance. Task performance is noticeable. When the employee performs the required part of their tasks and requirements well, they will receive gratitude and rewards. Employees have to fulfill the fundamental part of their mandatory job requirements to keep their employment. (Chiaburu, Oh, Wang, & Stoverink, 2017). Task performance is in –role performance which requires desired results, products and behaviors by job description to reach organizational goals (Bakker et al., 2012). It is also defined as activities that transform raw materials into products or service which is manufactured by company (Aguinis, 2014). Contextual performance is not task-based behaviors that support the organization efficiency by delivering psychological positive environment. Some of the scholars use “organization citizenship behavior” (Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983), “extra-role performance” and “pro-social behavior” as contextual performance. Also, it stalks from personal characters and is not linked to task requirements. Contextual performance includes behaviors such as putting extra effort on organization well-being, helping others to achieve or complete their jobs, volunteering to do task activities which are not formally part of the job, cooperating with colleagues, following organization guidelines and policies, endorsing and supporting (Aguinis, 2014). Also, contextual performance was explained as “willingness to cooperate” for the excellence of the workplace also, it is non-job-specific and optional which is means 9.

(18) “employees do not have to engage in citizenship behavior to maintain their employment, although citizenship behaviors in aggregate enhance the psycho-social functioning of the work environment and lubricate interpersonal interactions, which indirectly enhances the effectiveness of the targets of the citizenship behavior as well as the employee who engages in those citizenship behaviors” (Chiaburu et al., 2017, p.99).. Types of Protean Career Attitude, Task and Contextual Performance Protean career is a career driven by one’s own value and self-directed career management to adapt new performance standards and learning requirements (Briscoe & Hall, 2006). When protean type needs to go through a career cycle which requires them to adapt new learning demand and performance requirements, they have skills on adaptability (Segers et al., 2008). De Vos and Soens (2008) explained that self-management behaviors emerge by collecting and finding out possible career opportunities, looking for feedback about performance and competencies, building career chances by interacting and networking and improving abilities. Segars et al. (2008) suggested that protean type should be motivated by challenging targets, extending abilities and training and development opportunities. This means that protean type has developmental behavior. A study by Baruch (2014) shows that protean career attitude positively related to performance. Protean type of individuals may have good task performance because they always look for development opportunities to enhance their ability and competence to reach new performance standards and their own goals. According to the literature, protean type of individuals is more likely to be self-confident (Hall, 2004), hard-working, optimistic (Waters et al., 2014) and good at what they are doing. They are frequent learners and being always ready for new opportunities and possibilities, seeing career as a progressive learning cycles (Hall, 2004). They also have communication and networking skills to cope and enhance their employment opportunities and improve their working conditions (Waters et al., 2014). Therefore, they can be excellent at their tasks and responsibilities which are described on their job description because they are active learner. On the other hand, protean types seem “selfish” because they just follow their own interest and dream. They may have high levels of intention to leave. However research states that protean career attitude was not correlated to intention to leave (Baruch, 2014) and was positively correlated to organizational commitment (Briscoe & Finkelstein, 2009). Therefore, they may have positive relationship with contextual 10.

(19) performance because they already did their career choice based on their own value and interests.. Hypothesis 1: Protean type has a positive correlation with both task and contextual performance.. Reactive type is not value-driven, but self-directed protean type and as Briscoe (2015) described, this type is most problematic because they are “good at driving career behavior toward their interests. However, they are not clear on the values driving their interests” (p.7). Also, Briscoe and Hall (2006) explained that individuals who are reactive, cannot manage their career effectively because they would not have the perspective to guide their own career adequately. In addition, Ducker (2005) explained on his “Managing Oneself” article on Harvard Business Review, that organization value and employee value should be similar or wellmatched with each other. Otherwise employees feel frustrated, which results in poor performance. He stated that “Working in organization whose value system is unacceptable or incompatible with one’s own condemns a person both to frustration and to nonperformance” (Ducker, 2005, p.6). Therefore, the following hypothesis was developed.. Hypothesis 2: Reactive type has a negative correlation with both task and contextual performance.. Rigid type is highly value-driven but not self-directed in tactically managing their careers and they know what they want, but not excellent to get what they want (Briscoe, 2015). Based on Ducker’s (2005) explanation, if the values of individual and organization are matching, that person performs well. But if that individual does not have self-directed developmental attitude, not try to develop her/himself to reach the performance standard, it is impossible to say rigid type can perform well on tasks, especially in this changing and challenging work environment. When they follow their values and choose a valuematching organization, their organizational citizenship behavior (contextual performance) could be high. Therefore, the following hypotheses were developed.. Hypothesis 3a: Rigid type has a negative correlation with task performance. 11.

(20) Hypothesis 3b: Rigid type has a positive correlation with contextual performance.. Dependent type is neither self-directed nor value-driven, and is opposite of protean type. They do not know and care about what they have to do to effectively manage their career (Briscoe, 2015). Basically “dependent” type depends on organization and are not active in, nor a big player of career development. Only organization drives their career development. They are incapable to define the priorities and manage their career on their own (Briscoe & Hall, 2006) and do not have adapting skills and developmental attitude to guide their career or reach the performance standard. Especially in this “changing” world, individuals with dependent type cannot perform well without protean attitude.. Hypothesis 4: Dependent type has a negative correlation with both task and contextual performance.. Individuals who belong to protean type are named after protean talent who are fully responsible for their career development. They can choose their work place, field and organization based on their value, and they will develop themselves to reach their goals. Especially in this era, tasks and requirements are changing, transferring, shifting. It is not stable anymore. Therefore, only protean talents can survive this uncertain environment (Briscoe, 2015). As a result, the following hypothesis was developed: Hypothesis 5: Individuals with protean type have higher task and contextual performance comparing with other three (Dependent, Rigid, Reactive) types.. 12.

(21) CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY This chapter introduced methodology which used to conduct this study such as research framework, hypothesis tested and research procedure. It also provided sampling, questionnaire design, data collection and data analysis.. Research Framework Along with purpose of the study, research framework was composed as shown to in Figure 3.1. Protean career attitude with its four types are independent variables, task performance and contextual performance are dependent variables. Control variables are work tenure and education.. Protean Career Attitude -. Dependent Rigid Reactive Protean. H1. H3. Task performance H5 H2. H4. Contextual performance. Control variables Figure 3.1. Research framework. 13. Work tenure Education level.

(22) Hypothesis Based on research framework, the following hypotheses were purposed. Hypothesis 1: Protean type has a positive correlation with both task and contextual performance. Hypothesis 2: Reactive type has a negative correlation with both task and contextual performance. Hypothesis 3a: Rigid type has a negative correlation with task performance. Hypothesis 3b: Rigid type has a positive correlation with contextual performance. Hypothesis 4: Dependent type has a negative correlation with both task and contextual performance. Hypothesis 5: Individuals with protean type have higher task and contextual performance comparing with other three (Dependent, Rigid, Reactive) types.. Sample The target sample of this study was the full-time employees in Mongolia. According to the data from National Statistical office of Mongolia, the total number of employed people is 1,332,843 in end of 2016. The 580,975 of total employed people are wage and salary workers in Mongolia. Convenience sampling and snowball sampling approach were used in this study. Participants of this study were 302 full-time, wage and salary workers in public, private sector and non-governmental organizations in Mongolia. The data were collected by online questionnaire and paper-based questionnaire.. Data Collection The period of data collection was beginning of March to end of April in 2016. As mentioned before, the convenience and snowball sampling technique were used to collect data in this study. Questionnaires were posted online, and online questionnaire link was sent to people who has a full-time job on social media networks such Facebook, Line and LinkedIn, and they were asked fill out and send questionnaire to their colleagues, classmates, friends and relatives. Approximately 350 participants were contacted and invited to complete online questionnaire through social media networks. Also 80 paper-based questionnaires were distributed to two private companies and one non-governmental organization but 50 14.

(23) questionnaires were valid and complete. Total number of 302 valid and complete questionnaires were collected.. Questionnaire Design The questionnaires were designed to collect data on protean career attitude and job performance. The items in the questionnaire are originally developed in English. But questionnaires were translated into Mongolian because sample were Mongolians. Translation were controlled by Brislin’s (1980) translation-back-translation procedure (Lin, 2015) with the Nyamdorj. D’s help who is TESOL English teacher at Mongolian University of Science and Technology. After translation, proof reading had been done by journalist, Delgermurun. E, to check stylistics for making easier to understand for participants. Questionnaires including 30 item and 7 demographic information, were accompanied by a cover letter, which describes the purpose of the study and assures the participants that the data is confidential and only used for academic purpose. In order to increase the response rate, downloadable link of best-seller e-book were attached in the end of the online questionnaire. Also, the questionnaire used different Likert scales (5 point and 7 point) to reduce common method variance which might create systematic measurement error (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003).. Measurements The measurements used for this study include protean career attitude, task performance and contextual performance scales.. Protean Career Attitude Protean career attitude survey is developed by Briscoe and Hall in 2006. According to the literature, this scale has been the most widely applied scale with high reliability and validity to test protean career attitude (Waters et al., 2014). The survey consists of 14 items such as “Freedom to choose my own career path is one of my most important values”. All scales were assessed along 5 point Likert scale ranging from ‘Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree” and higher scores specify higher levels of concept. The scale includes two dimensions: self-direction with eight items and values-driven with six items. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for the protean career attitude scale was 0.80. The total items of protean career attitude were drawn on the following table (Table 3.1.). 15.

(24) Table 3.1. Protean Career Attitudes Scale Protean Career Attitude 1. When development opportunities have not been offered by my company, I’ve sought them out on my own.. 2. I am responsible for my success or failure in my career.. 3. Overall, I have a very independent, self-directed career.. 4. Freedom to choose my own career path is one of my most important values.. 5. I am in charge of my own career.. 6. Ultimately, I depend upon myself to move my career forward.. 7. Where my career is concerned, I am very much “my own person.”. 8. In the past I have relied more on myself than others to find a new job when necessary.. 9. I navigate my own career, based on my personal priorities, as opposed to my employer’s priorities.. 10. It doesn’t matter much to me how other people evaluate the choices I make in my career.. 11. What’s most important to me is how I feel about my career success, not how other people feel about it.. 12. I’ll follow my own conscience if my company asks me to do something that goes against my values.. 13. What I think about what is right in my career is more important to me than what my company thinks.. 14. In the past I have sided with my own values when the company has asked me to do something I don’t agree with.. Task and Contextual Performance Job performance scale was accessed 16 items scale which developed by Goodman and Svyantek (1999) which is widely used to test task and contextual performance. All scales were assessed along 7-point Likert scale ranging from “Not at all likely” to “Extremely likely” and higher scores specify higher levels of concept. The job performance has two 16.

(25) dimensions which are task performance and contextual performance. The 9 items of this scale (item number 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16) are for task performance. A example of item is “I perform well in the overall job by carrying out tasks as expected”. The other 7 items (item number 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13) are for contextual performance such as “I make innovative suggestions to improve the overall quality of the department”. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for job performance was 0.86, task performance scale was 0.85, for contextual performance was 0.77 (Demerouti, Xanthopoulou, Tsaousis, & Bakker, 2014). The total items of job performance were drawn on the following table (Table 3.2.). Table 3.2. Job Performance Scale Job performance 1. I help others employers with their work when they have been absent.. 2. I achieve the objectives of my job.. 3. I volunteer to do things not formally required by the job.. 4. I meet the criteria for performance.. 5. I take initiatives to orient new employees to the department even though not part of my job description.. 6. I demonstrate expertise in all job-related tasks.. 7. I help others when their work load increases (assists others until they get over the hurdles).. 8. I fulfill all the requirements of the job.. 9. I assist your colleagues with their duties.. 10. I can manage more responsibility than typically assigned.. 11. I make innovative suggestions to improve the overall quality of the department.. 12. I appear suitable for a higher level role.. 13. I willingly attend functions not required by the organization, but helps in its overall image.. 14. I am competent in all areas of the job, handle tasks with proficiency.. 15. I perform well in the overall job by carrying out tasks as expected.. 16. I plan and organize to achieve objectives of the job and meet deadlines.. 17.

(26) Control Variables Past researches has shown age (Ng & Feldman, 2008), gender, tenure, and employment level (Edwards, Bell, Arthur, & Decuir, 2008) influence job performance. In order to have better understanding of the relationship of the variables, two control variables are used in this studies. These are work tenure and education level. Many researcher stated that education level is positively related to both task and contextual performance. Highly educated employees are more likely to show exessive innovation to show more citizenship performance than less educated employees (Ng & Feldmen, 2009). Further more, previous research has shown that work tenure is significantly related to task and contextual performance and knowledge and experience gained by work tenure has positive effect on job performance, moreover on both task and contextual performance (Chen & Kao, 2012).. Data Analysis The statistic software of IBM SPSS version 23 were used in this study to analyze the data from questionnaires. The methods of data analysis were included descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation analysis and ANCOVA for hypothesis testing. SPSS AMOS 23 used for Confirmatory Factor Analysis.. Descriptive Statistics This research used descriptive statistics to understand the characteristics of the respondents’ profiles. Participants were asked to provide their age, gender, marital status, work tenure, education level, employment level and type of organization.. Pearson Correlation Analysis To understand the relationship between protean career attitude and job performance, Pearson coefficient was used to examine the correlations. The Pearson’s correlation (r) was used to determine whether there is linear or direct correlation between each variable. When the correlation coefficient is high, it shows that there is a strong relationship between that two variables. The number of correlation should be between -1 and 1. When r equal to 1, it is perfect correlation. If r equal to 0, it is no correlation. If r = -1, it is perfect negative correlation. Low correlation is considered as r below 0.4; medium correlation is considered r 18.

(27) between 0.4 and 0.7; high correlation is considered r over 0.7 (Davis, 1971). The correlation coefficient demonstrates whether variables are related and considered as the base when explaining whether a variable can make predictions of the outcome variable.. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Confirmatory Factor Analysis allow to test how well the measured variables represent the smaller number of construct. The SPSS AMOS 23 was used to test the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and check the validity of the measurement models for each variable. Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), the Incremental Fit Index (IFI), the Normed Fit Index (NFI), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis Index or (TLI), the Root Mean Square of Approximation (RMSEA) were used to examine model fit. Result of the Chi-square divided by degrees of freedom (𝑋 2 /df) smaller than 2.0 is considered a very good fit, but from 2.0 to 5.0 is acceptable RMSEA ranges from 0 to 1, smaller range showing better fit. CFI ranges from 0 to 1, bigger range shows better fit of the model. More than 0.9 is acceptable. Ranges for NFI and TLI is from 0 to 1, more than 0.9 and more indicates better fit of the model. GFI range between 0 to 1 and more than 0.9 indicates acceptable fit (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010).. CFA for Protean Career Atitude Protean career attitude has two dimensions which are self-directed and value-driven. Protean career attitude scale has 14 items, first 8 items for self-directed dimension, last 6 items for value-driven dimension. The result of goodness of fit indicators 𝑋 2 /df (2.86), RMSEA (.08), CFI (.87), NFI (.82), IFI (.88), TLI (.85), GFI (.91) was shown following table (Table 3.3.) and figure (Figure 3.2.).. Table 3.3. Protean Career Attitude Model Fit Summary 𝑋2 Protean career attitude. df. 217.41 76. 𝑋 2 /df RMSEA CFI 2.86. 0.08 0.87. 19. NFI. IFI. TLI. GFI. 0.82. 0.88. 0.85. 0.91.

(28) Figure 3.2. Protean career attitude CFA measurement model. 20.

(29) CFA for Task Performance Job performance scale has two dimensions, which are Task and Contextual performance. Task Performance scale has 9 items. The result of goodness of fit for Task performance indicators was shown following table (Table 3.4.) and figure (Figure 3.3.), and most of the factors 𝑋 2 /df (3.82), RMSEA (0.1), CFI (.93), NFI (.91), IFI (.93), TLI (.91), GFI (.93) fitted in standard criteria.. Table 3.4. Task Performance Model Fit Summary 𝑋2 Task performance. df. 103.05 27. 𝑋 2 /df RMSEA CFI 3.82. 0.1 0.93. 21. NFI. IFI. TLI. GFI. 0.91. 0.93. 0.91. 0.93.

(30) Figure 3.3. Task performance CFA measurement model. 22.

(31) CFA for Contextual Performance Job performance scale has two dimensions, which are Task and Contextual performance. Contextual Performance scale has 7 items. The result of goodness of fit for Contextual performance indicators was shown following table (Table 3.5.) and figure (Figure 3.4.) and most of the factors X 2 /df (3.21), RMSEA (0.09), CFI (.94), NFI (.92), IFI (.94), TLI (.91), GFI (.96) fitted in standard criteria.. Table 3.5. Contextual Performance Model Fit Summary 𝑋2 Contextual performance. df. 44.89 14. 𝑋 2 /df RMSEA CFI 3.21. NFI. 0.09 0.94 0.92. Figure 3.4. Contextual performance CFA measurement model. 23. IFI. TLI. GFI. 0.94. 0.91. 0.96.

(32) Pilot Test A pilot study was implemented to test the reliability and validity of measurements. The purpose of pilot test was to identify potential misunderstanding of measurement and its translation, and to revise if there anything unclear on the questionnaire. The sample was collected from 75 full time employees located in Mongolia. A total of 87 questionnaires were distributed. Majority of the sample were female (74.7%), male (25.3%). Mean age of respondents were 29. Over half of respondents were married (58.7%) and 37.3% of them were still single. Most of the respondents have Bachelor degree (77.3%) of education and have entry level (62.7%) job. The 47.5% of respondents have 0-5 years of working experience, 34.3% of respondents have 6-10 years of working experience. Over half of respondents work in private sector (58.7%). Pearson’s correlations analysis was conducted to confirm reliability of the measurement and to understand relationship between variables with dimensions and control variables. The descriptive statistics is shown in the following table (Table 3.6.).. Table 3.6. Descriptive Statistics for Pilot Test (n=75) Item 1. Gender. 2. Age. 3. Marital status. Frequencies Percentage % Female. 56. 74.7. Male. 19. 25.3. Total. 75. 100. 20-30. 52. 69.3. 31-40. 21. 28. 41-50. 2. 2.7. Total. 75. 100. Married. 44. 58.7. Single. 28. 37.3. 3. 4. 75. 100. Divorced/Separated/Widowed Total. (continued). 24.

(33) Table 3.6. (continued) Item. Frequencies Percentage %. 4. Education level. 5. Employment level. Secondary. 0. 0. Vocational Training. 1. 1.3. Bachelor. 58. 77.3. Master. 16. 21.3. PhD. 0. 0. Total. 75. 100. Employee. 47. 62.7. Middle manager. 26. 34.7. 2. 2.6. Total. 75. 100. 0-5 years. 35. 47.9. 6-10 years. 25. 34.3. 11-15 years. 9. 12.3. 16-20 years. 3. 4.1. 20-more years. 1. 1.4. Total. 73. 100. Public. 26. 34.7. Private. 44. 58.7. Non-Governmental Organization. 3. 4. International organization. 2. 2.6. 75. 100. Top manager. 6. Work tenure. 7. Type of organization. Total. For the reliability analysis, the accepted value of Cronbach’s alpha has to be bigger than .7 (Nunnally, 1978). Cronbach’s alpha for two measurements were .71 for protean career attitude, .80 for Task performance and .75 for Contextual performance, which were acceptable (Table 3.7.).. 25.

(34) Table 3.7. Cronbach’s Alpha for Pilot Test (n=75) Cronbach’s Alpha. Variables 1. Protean career attitude. .71. 2. Task Performance. .80. 3. Contextual Performance. .75. 26.

(35) CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND FINDINGS This chapter introduces the result of data analysis, findings and hypothesis testing of this study. Descriptive statistics analysis, correlation and reliability analysis and confirmatory factor analysis are presented. Last part of this chapter shows hypothesis testing by ANCOVA.. Descriptive Statistics The sample were collected from 302 full-time employees from Mongolia. Approximately 350 participants were contacted and invited to complete questionnaire through social media networks and total of 80 paper-based questionnaires were distributed in two private companies and one non-governmental organization. The 252 online and 50 paperbased valid questionnaire were collected. Table 4.1 shows frequencies and percentage of demographic information of samples. Majority of the sample were female (75.5%), and 24.5% were male. Most of respondents were 20-30 years old (67.6%) old. More than half of the participants were married (60.3%) and 36.1% of participants were still single. The respondents mostly have Bachelor degree (73.2%) of education, 21.5% of respondents have Master degree which is most of the respondents were highly educated. In the data, the 61.6% of respondents were entry level employee, 35.1% were middle manager. But only 3.3% of respondents were top management position. The more than half of the respondents (52.7%) have 0-5 years of working experience, 29.5% have 6-10 years of working experience. Most of the respondents are working in private sector (57.3%), and 37.8% of respondents were public servant.. 27.

(36) Table 4.1. Descriptive Statistics (n=302) Item 1. Gender. 2. Age. Frequencies. Female. 228. 75.5%. Male. 74. 24.5%. Total. 302. 100%. 20-30. 204. 67.6%. 31-40. 77. 25.5%. 41-50. 17. 5.6%. 4. 1.3%. Total. 302. 100%. Married. 182. 60.3%. Single. 109. 36.1%. 11. 3.6%. 302. 100%. Secondary. 8. 2.7%. Vocational Training. 7. 2.3%. 221. 73.2%. 65. 21.5%. 1. 0.3%. Total. 302. 100%. Employee. 186. 61.6%. Middle manager. 106. 35.1%. 10. 3.3%. 302. 100%. 51-more. 3. Marital status. Divorced/Separated/Widowed Total 4. Education level. Bachelor Master PhD. 5. Employment level. Percentage. Top manager Total. (continued). 28.

(37) Table 4.1. (continued) Item 6. Work tenure. 7. Type of organization. Frequencies. Percentage. 0-5 years. 159. 52.7%. 6-10 years. 89. 29.5%. 11-15 years. 30. 9.9%. 16-20 years. 11. 3.6%. 20-more years. 13. 4.3%. Total. 302. 100%. Public. 99. 32.8%. Private. 173. 57.3%. Non-Governmental Organization. 16. 5.3%. International organization. 14. 4.6%. 302. 100%. Total. Correlation and Reliability Analysis In order to identify the relationship between protean career attitude, task and contextual performance, and confirm the reliability of measurements, Pearson’s correlation analysis were conducted. Table 4.2 shows the mean value, standard deviation, correlation and reliability between variables. Satisfactory level of Cronbach’s alpha is bigger than 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978) for reliability analysis. Cronbach’s alpha for protean career attitude was .80, task performance .85, and contextual performance was .77. All of the measurements reliability were higher than satisfactory level. The result of correlation shows that protean career attitude has significant, moderate and positive correlation with task performance (r = .49, p < 0.001) and contextual performance (r = .40, p < 0.001).. 29.

(38) Table 4.2. Mean, Standard Deviation, Correlations, and Reliability (n=302) Mean. SD. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1 Work Tenure. 7.0. 5.92. 1. 2 Education level. 3.2. .57. .03. 1. 3 Protean Career Attitude. 4.1. .52. .004. .09. (.80). 4 Contextual Performance. 5.8. .80. -.04. .07. .40***. (.77). 5 Task Performance. 6.0. .73. .03. .09. .49***. .69***. (.85). Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. The total number of 119 participants are belonged to “Protean” type. The Protean type has significant, positive, and low correlation with task (r = .35, p < 0.001) and contextual (r = .38, p < 0.001) performance (Table 4.3.). Therefore, Hypothesis 1 “Protean type has a positive correlation with both task and contextual performance” was supported. Table 4.3. Correlation between Protean Type, Task performance and Contextual Performance (n=119) Mean. SD. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 Tenure. 6.74. 6.08. 2 Education. 3.19. .54. .13. 3 Protean. 4.53. .25. -.07. .03. (.80). 4 Task performance. 6.33. .51. -.05. .003. .35***. (.85). 5 Contextual performance 6.03. .68. -.07. .11. .38***. .59***. 5. (.77). Note: *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. The total number of 66 participants are belonged to “Reactive” type. The Table 4.4. shows that Reactive type does not have statistically significant correlation with both task and contextual performance. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 “Reactive type has a negative correlation with both task and contextual performance.” was not supported.. 30.

(39) Table 4.4. Correlation between Reactive Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance (n=66) Mean. SD. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 Tenure. 6.85. 5.52. 2 Education. 3.23. .52. .03. 3 Reactive. 3.98. .20. .06. .22. (.80). 4 Task performance. 6.15. .54. .18. .22. .22. (.85). 5 Contextual performance 5.87. .69. .07. .18. .01. .51***. 5. (.77). Note: *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. The total numbers of 45 participants are belonged to “Rigid” type. The Table 4.5. shows that rigid type does not have statistically significant correlation with both task and contextual performance. Therefore, Hypothesis 3a “Rigid type has a negative correlation with task performance” was not supported. As well as, 3b “Rigid type has a positive correlation with contextual performance” was not supported.. Table 4.5. Correlation between Rigid Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance (n=45) Mean. SD. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 Tenure. 7.7. 5.96. 2 Education. 3.04. .67. .09. 3 Rigid. 4.05. .19. .14. .16. (.80). 4 Task performance. 5.82. .75. .24. .18. .23. 1. 5 Contextual performance 5.66. .83. -.07. .02. .17. .74***. 5. (.77). Note: *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. The total numbers of 72 participants belonged to “Dependent” type. Table 4.6. shows that dependent type has significant, positive, and medium correlation with task (r = .45, p < 0.001) and contextual (r = .49, p < 0.001) performance. Therefore, hypothesis 4 “Dependent type has a negative correlation with both task and contextual performance” was not supported.. 31.

(40) Table 4.6. Correlation Between Dependent Type, Task Performance and Contextual Performance (n=72) Mean. SD. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 Tenure. 6.95. 6.08. 2 Education. 3.08. .60. -.14. 3 Dependent. 3.389. .38. .10. .04. (.80). 4 Task performance. 5.61. .93. -.04. -.02. .45***. (.85). 5 Contextual performance 5.46. .92. -.03. -.07. .49***. .73***. 5. (.77). Note: *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was implemented to verify validity of measurement models by AMOS version 23. The number of participants of this study was 302. The Table 4.7. shows CFA for each variables (protean career attitude, task performance and contextual performance) and its one, two and three-factor models. The protean career attitude was measured with 14 items in the questionnaire. The result of 𝑋 2 /df (2.86), RMSEA (0.08), CFI (.87), IFI (.88) and TLI (.85) were all acceptable.. Task and contextual. performance were measured with 16 items in the questionnaire. The result of task performance were 𝑋 2 /df (3.82), RMSEA (0.1), CFI (.93), IFI (.93) and TLI (.91), for contextual performance were 𝑋 2 /df (3.21), RMSEA (0.09), CFI (.94), IFI (.94) and TLI (.91) and all were almost in acceptable range.. 32.

(41) Table 4.7. Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis (n=302) x2/d. RMSE. f. A. x2. df. Protean career attitude. 217.41. 76. 2.86. 0.08. Task performance. 103.05. 27. 3.82. 0.1. 44.89. 14. 3.21. 0.09. 1628.2. 40. 4. 6. 4.01. 0.1. 2.37. 0.07. 3.1. 0.83. Contextual performance One-factor Model. Two-factor Model. Three-factor model. 950.86. 40 2. 1251.3. 40. 5. 4. CFI. NFI. IFI. TLI. GFI. 0.8. 0.8. 0.8. 0.8. 0.9. 7. 2. 8. 5. 1. 0.9. 0.9. 0.9. 0.9. 0.9. 3. 1. 3. 1. 3. 0.9. 0.9. 0.9. 0.9. 0.9. 4. 2. 4. 1. 6. 0.6. 0.5. 0.6. 3. 6. 3. 0.8. 0.7. 0.8. 0.8. 0.8. 3. 4. 3. 2. 2. 0.7. 0.6. 0.7. 0.7. 0.7. 4. 6. 4. 2. 8. 0.6. 0.6 9. ANCOVA The Table 4.8. shows number of participants for each type of protean career attitude. Type 1 represents dependent (n=72), Type 2 represents rigid (n=45), Type 3 represents reactive (n=66) and Type 4 represents protean talent (n=119). Table 4.8. Numbers of Each Type of Protean Career Attitude (n=302) No. Type. N. 1. Dependent. 72. 2. Rigid. 45. 3. Reactive. 66. 4. Protean. 119. 33.

(42) Table 4.9. Comparison of Protean Types with Other Types on Task and Contextual Performance (n=302) Task Performance Mean. Std.. Difference. Error. .71***. Rigid Reactive. Dependen Protean. t. Contextual performance Mean. Std.. Sig. Difference. Error. Sig. 0.10. 000. .56***. 0.12. 000. .50***. 0.12. 000. .35+. 0.14. 0.06. .19. 0.10. .16. 0.12. 1. 0.45 2. Note: +p ≤ .05. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.. The Table 4.9. shows that difference between each types on task performance and contextual performance. Protean type has significantly higher task performance than “Dependent” and “Rigid” group. But not significantly higher than “Reactive” types. “Protean” type has significantly higher contextual performance than “Dependent” and “Rigid” types. But not significantly higher than “Reactive” type. Therefore, Hypothesis 5 “Individuals with protean type have higher task and contextual performance comparing with other three (Dependent, Rigid, Reactive) types.” was partially supported. The following Table 4.10. shows result of hypotheses are tested in this study.. 34.

(43) Table 4.10. Hypothesis Testing Results Summary Hypothesis H1. Result Protean type has positive correlation with both task and. Supported. contextual performance. H2. Reactive type has negative correlation with both task and. Not supported. contextual performance. H3. a) Rigid type has negative correlation with task performance.. Not supported. b) Rigid type has positive correlation with contextual performance. H4. Dependent type has negative correlation with both task and. Not supported. contextual performance. H5. Individuals with protean type have higher task and contextual Partially supported performance comparing with other three (Dependent, Rigid, Reactive) types.. 35.

(44) 36.

(45) CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION This chapter provides conclusion of the study and discuss overall implication of the study based on results and findings. Limitation in data analysis and research design, suggestion for future study are also included.. Types of Protean Career Attitude, Task and Contextual Performance According to the result of this study shows that, protean and dependent type has high performance on task and contextual performance. Protean type (protean talent) of individuals are fully responsible for their own dream, careers and their future. They know what they want from “life” generally. “Protean” type of individuals are self-directed and value-driven, they already know what is their value, what is their interest. Then, they do career decisions based on their own interest and value, also develop themselves to reach their own goals. Selfdevelopment is essential for them. When they have to find a new job, or during unemployed period of time, they do many researches and using their networks to find their own “perfect” employer. As they got their perfect or suitable, or even their dream job, they perform well, if they are not good enough on their job, they learn, and develop themselves to reach the performance requirements and standards. This is the reason why protean talent has higher task and contextual performance or even that organization is not the “perfect” choice for them, at least there should have the reason which can be organization or that job is the one step forward to their own mission in the future. On the other hand, “Dependent” type of individual has high performance even they do not have neither self-directed and value driven, which means this type of individual truly depend on the organization. They are truly attached or committed to the organization which is the reason why they perform well on both task and contextual performance. They should perform well to keep their employment because they have traditional career development perspective to develop their career. They only depend where they work and follow how organization decide their career. Which makes them perform well and be honest to the organization. For “Rigid” type of protean career attitude, individuals who has this type of protean career attitude are value-driven but not self-directed which means they are not able to adapt to the development requirements and performance standards (Briscoe & Hall, 2006). They make decisions based on their value but they may face lack of knowledge, skills and abilities to perform well in the organization. 37.

(46) “Reactive” type of protean career attitude, they are self-directed, but not value driven. They do adapt learning demands and performance requirements, but do not make career decisions by their internal values and individual career success (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). They may try to perform well and develop themselves, but they may not perfectly fit organization, or job. Or their own value does not match the organization value which can be one reason to perform poorly.. Implication for Research There are not many studies focused on types of protean career attitude. This study makes valuable contribution to the literature to understand more about types of protean career attitude and its relationship between task and contextual performance. Types of protean career attitude are basically own career management attitude of individuals. For example, “Dependent” is one type of protean career attitude but which does not have protean career attitude features (self-directed and value-driven). Therefore, these types can be called types of own career management or types on self-career management. This types can be studied more specifically in the future.. Implications for Practice Due to this knowledge based economy, human talent is very important. In order to survive in this rapid changing and challenging environment, attracting and retaining talent is a major strategic affair for the organizations (Cabrera, 2009), on the other hand, managing their own career and being proactive is the key ability for the individuals. This research provides that the protean career attitude has significant positive relationship between task and contextual performance, and some types of protean career attitude (dependent and protean) has significant positive correlation. Moreover, literature shows that organizational career management were related to performance, and goal setting has positive impact on performance and organizational career management system and development opportunities has positive effect on individual performance (Yahya & Othman, 2004). Protean career attitude is positively correlated to career success, and proactive individuals who initiate in developing their careers always experienced a more satisfying level of career success. This study shows types of protean career attitude (dependent and protean) are good performers both on task and contextual performance. Therefore, protean career attitude and 38.

(47) self- managed career attitude has positive impact on organization. As well as, this study provide evidence for HR practitioner to understand more about types of protean career attitude (own career management of employees), and to create effective career management system and to implement right strategy to retain protean types of employees. According to the result of this study, protean talents (protean type) have significant higher task and contextual performance, then organization always wants to have productive employees who have learning abilities and high adaptation in changing market. As Hall (2004) purposed to the organization and management team to help their employees make protean changes which can be challenging job tasks and assignments, create and support developmental relationships with their peers and subordinates or career coaches, formal and informal training and education, other developmental opportunities, and providing information about future opportunities.. Limitation of the Study There are several limitations in this study. First, this study uses self-reported data which might contains several potential biases such as single source bias. Second, samples used in this study was convenience and snow ball sampling which can associate with sampling bias and may not be representative of the population. Also most of the data was collected through online questionnaire, respondents may not felt encouraged to provide honest answers. Furthermore, different understanding and interpretation can influence answers of the respondents because of the translation of measurement. Original version of measurement was in English. But in this studies, measurements were translated into Mongolian language. Even though “Translation-back translation” procedure has been done to control translations, several complains from respondents were received on some items of measurements.. Future Research Suggestions This study only focus on types of protean career attitude and tried to investigate relationship between task and contextual performance. Task and contextual performance is dependent variable, many factors and aspects influence on performance. Therefore, further research can be focused more on types of protean career attitude and its performance with moderating effects of other variables such as person job fit, person organization fit, or organizational commitment. For example, in order to understand more about relationship 39.

(48) between “Reactive” type and job performance can be checked with moderating effect of person organization fit to examine their values are matching or not. Although there were researches has been done on protean career attitude and organizational commitment, there is no negative relationship between organizational commitment and protean career attitude (Briscoe & Finkelstein, 2009). But if future researchers have done research on types of protean career attitude and organizational commitment, it would be interesting. Moreover, types of protean career attitude could be studied in depth to understand more about each types, for example main features of reactive type and main motivators for better performance etc. It would be very helpful for HR practitioner understand more about employee its career development attitude, and help them to manage their career. Due to competitive labor market changes, we are required to have protean career attitude and be responsible for our own career path. Recent research shows that specific individual, organizational and work related alternatives can lead protean career attitude (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). Therefore, next suggestion would be test and investigate what kind of variables can lead protean career attitude and how to develop protean attitude for employees and students. Also, managing protean talents and their retention would be one more interesting topic to investigate. It should be noted that sample was full-time employees in Mongolia. Cultural differences might affect the career attitudes (Segers et al., 2008), future research can test types of protean career attitude in across cultures.. 40.

(49) REFERENCES Aguinis, H. (2014). Performance management. London, England: Pearson Education Limited. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Brummelhuis. L. L. (2012). Work engagement, performance, and active learning: The role of conscientiousness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 555-564. Baruch, Y. (2014). The development and validation of a measure for protean career orientation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(19), 2702-2723. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99-109. Briscoe, J. P. (2015). Handbook of research on sustainable careers. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar. Briscoe, J. P., & Hall, D. T. (2006). The interplay of boundaryless and protean careers: Combinations and implications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 4-18. Briscoe, J. P., Hoobler, J. M., & Byle, K. A. (2010). Do “protean” employees make better leaders? The answer is in the eye of the beholder. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 783-795. Briscoe, J. P., Hall, D. T., & DeMuth, R. L. F. (2006). Protean and boundary less careers: An empirical exploration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 30-47. Briscoe, P. J., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2009). The “new career” and organizational commitment. Career Development International, 14(3), 242-260. Cabrera, E. F. (2009). Protean organizations: Reshaping work and careers to retain female talent. Career Development International, 14(2), 186-201. Carmeli, A., & Gefen. D. (2005). The relationship between work commitment models and employee withdrawal intentions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 63-86. Cerdina, J. L., & Pargneux, M. L. (2014). The impact of expatriates’ career characteristics on career and job satisfaction, and intention to leave: An objective and subjective fit approach. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(14), 20332049. Chen, C. F., & Kao, Y. L. (2012). Moderating effects of work engagement and job tenure on burnout-performance among flight attendants. Journal of Air Transport Management, 25(1), 61-63.. 41.

(50) Chiaburu, D. S. & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, ocbs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1082–1103. Chiaburu, D. S., Oh, I. S., Wang, J., & Stoverink, A. C. (2017). A bigger piece of the pie: The relative importance of affiliative and change-oriented citizenship and task performance in predicting overall job performance. Human Resource Management Review, 27(1), 97-107. Chin, W. S., & Rasdi, R. M. (2014). Protean career development: Exploring the individuals, organizational and job-related factors. Asian Social Science, 10(21), 203-215. Davis, J.A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. De Vos, A., & Soens, N. (2008). Protean attitude and career success: The mediating role of self-management. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(3), 449-456. Demerouti, E., Xanthopoulou, D., Tsaousis, I., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Disentangling task and contextual performance A multitrait-multimethod approach. Journal of Personnal Psychology, 13(2), 59-69. Ducker, P. F. (1999). Managing Oneself. Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 64-74. Edwards, B. E., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W., & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between facets of job satisfaction and task and contextual performance. Applied Psychology, 57(3), 441-465. Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person-organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(2), 254275. Hair, J. F., Black W. C. Anderson R. E., Babin B. J., & Anderson R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis.Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall. Hall, D. T. (2004). The protean career: A quarter-century journey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 1-13. Hall, D.T., & Goodale, J.G. (1986). Human resource management: Strategy, design and implement. Chicago, IL: Foresmen Company. Herman, J. B. (1973). Are situational contingencies limiting job attitude-job performance relationships? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10(2), 208-224. Inkson, K. (2006). Protean and boundaryless careers as metaphors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 48-63. Lin, Y. C. (2015). Are you a protean talent? The influence of protean career attitude, learninggoal orientation and perceived internal and external employability. Career Development International, 20(7), 753-772. 42.