Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Executive Master Consulting and Coaching for Change
Florence Bernet
Professional Commitment:
Perceptions and Experiences of GenY
Professionals in Singapore
May 2013
INSEAD
Edited by Choo, Kah Ying Morally supported by Nicolas, Romane and Dorian Inglezakis
2
Table of contents
I – Abstract ............................................................................................................ 3
II – Key Words ........................................................................................................ 4
III-‐ Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4
IV – Research aims and objectives .......................................................................... 8
V -‐ Literature review .............................................................................................. 9 Defining commitment ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Intrinsic Motivation, a Foundation for Professional Commitment ............................................ 11 Self-‐Determination as a Process of Commitment Building ........................................................... 13 Experiencing Work as a Flow .................................................................................................................... 15 In the Background of GenYs : Early Adulthood Life-‐Stage ............................................................ 17 Mindset: From the Socializing Mind to the Self-‐Authored Mind ................................................ 18 Cultural Influences on Mindset ................................................................................................................. 19 Global and Local Generational findings ................................................................................................. 19
VI -‐ Methodology ................................................................................................. 21 Methodological overall approach and underlying assumptions ................................................ 21 Laying ground for the research ................................................................................................................. 23 Collecting and analyzing the data ............................................................................................................ 24 VII – Description of the research setting ............................................................... 24
VIII – Findings and analysis ................................................................................... 28 Description of interviewees ........................................................................................................................ 28 How GenYs perceive their environment and expectations ........................................................... 30 Chasing the Dream .......................................................................................................................................... 33 Thought Process on Career Choice .......................................................................................................... 34 Value of work .................................................................................................................................................... 36 Committing (or not) to a job ....................................................................................................................... 38 Being committed ............................................................................................................................................. 41 Generational Perspective ............................................................................................................................. 44
IX – Discussion ..................................................................................................... 45 Perception and value of professional commitment of GenYs in Singapore ........................... 45 Drivers of professional commitment ...................................................................................................... 47 A group of self-‐authoring GenYs ? ............................................................................................................ 48 Implications for organizations .................................................................................................................. 52
X – Limitations ..................................................................................................... 54
XI -‐ Future Research ............................................................................................. 54
XII – Conclusion .................................................................................................... 55
XIII – References .................................................................................................. 56
Appendix A – “Question storming” with Interns and graduates ............................ 59
Appendix B – ESSEC Intercultural workshop outcomes ......................................... 62
3
I – Abstract
Despite a higher level of satisfaction towards work, the youngest of Generation Y
(GenY) workers (16-‐24 years old) are also in greater number to consider
switching jobs in the short term. Amidst the high cost of recruitment, training,
and the cultivation of talent, many traditional organizations are focusing on
improving retention. However, their endeavor is exacerbated by a general trend
of disengagement in the workforce.
To date, most of the academic research studies on GenY’s work behaviors have
adopted the quantitative approach, with a focus on the Western world. Thus,
there is a gap in understanding with regards to the work attitudes and behaviors
of GenY Asian professionals, specifically their professional commitment.
This research study employed a qualitative ethnographic research to investigate
workplace commitment of 16-‐24 years old Asian individuals (employed or about
to be permanently employed) in high skilled professional jobs in Singapore.
Findings were gathered from 15 Singapore-‐based young professionals who were
graduating, or just have graduated from Singapore’s universities, through semi-‐
structured interviews. Conceptual frameworks covering commitment,
motivation theories, and specifically self-‐determination, human development
stage as well as the Asian cultural key factors in work behaviors were then used
to analyze the findings.
Professional commitment is a concept experienced within the boundaries of set
expectations, and considered as a contractual agreement. In a context of life
exploration and available job opportunities, with lesser familial influences,
Singapore based GenYs negotiate their commitment primarily based on their
comfort and competence needs. However, this research study highlighted the
greater importance of self-‐awareness in building strong and effective
professional commitment.
4
II – Key Words
Professional Commitment – Generation Y – GenY – Millenials -‐ Singapore –
Motivation – Mentorship – Self-‐determination -‐ Human Development –
Qualitative research – Ethnography
III-‐ Introduction
According to the Mercer’s 2011 What Works study GenY (also known as
“Millenials”, born between 1980 and 2000) and specifically those aged between
16 and 24 are the most satisfied with their organization. Their satisfaction levels
with regards to their organizations and their work exceeded those of the overall
workforce by 5% and 3% respectively. Yes, of all generations, GenY had the
highest number of individuals who planned to leave their role within the next
year -‐ 10% more than the overall workforce.
Many firms can attest to this phenomenon: according to a Deloitte’s (2010)
study, Talent Edge 2020: Blueprints for the New Normal” 72% of decision
makers expected an increase in their GenY turnover.
Though figures of turnover costs, including both direct and indirect costs, can
vary across the board, it could go as high as 150% of the employee’s yearly
remuneration package Direct costs refer to the leaving costs, replacement costs
and transitions costs, and indirect costs relate to the loss of production, reduced
performance levels, unnecessary overtime and low morale (Schlesinger &
Heskett, 1991; Bliss, 2013). Beyond costs, firms may also lose out on a
competitive advantage, for example better customer attraction and retention, or
“the loyalty surplus” -‐ “the excess productivity created by employees who stay
longer than they do at a typical competing company”(Reichheld, 1996, p128).
5
It is arguable that this phenomenon of the lack of professional commitment
could have its origins in the transformation of the economy during the 1980s and
the 1990s. By reengineering their work processes, downsizing their workforce,
and deploying their operations to lower cost regions, the corporate world has
damaged employee engagement and loyalty of elders workers -‐ the parents of
GenY’s (Bardwick, 2008).
Ten years ago – a time when GenY studies were still not a trending topic in
management literature – Walker Information and Global Network along with the
Hudson Institute conducted a worldwide study on employee loyalty, involving
more than 9000 employees. The researchers found out that only 34% were truly
loyal – “working hard, staying late, go the extra mile, and recommending the
company to their friends” -‐ Thirty one percent felt “trapped” (would like to leave
their job but were unable to so for various reasons). As for the remainder of the
respondents, 8% were open to external offers and 27% were actively disengaged
and actively looking for alternative roles (cited in Sweetman, 2001).
In the background, especially in the US, Judith Bardwick identified that
employees lost their sense of job security and the certainty of a gradual
incremental rise in their standards of living. She labeled the outcome of a
persisting sense of vulnerability now and for the future as a “psychological
recession”, especially salient for the Baby Boomers and GenX generations
(Bardwick, p14). In that context, intuitively, it is hard to consider gaining
effective employee commitment when many organizations are not able to
guarantee reciprocal commitment in the long run. On a granular level, Bardwick
notes the results of a study conducted by Towers Perrin in 2003 “Working
Today: Exploring Employees’ Emotional Connection to Their Jobs”, covering
1100 people from 1004 companies with 500 or more employees. Fifty five
percent of respondents felt they were “exhausted, confused and unsupported”
and that most of the complaints included boredom due to a non-‐challenging job,
heavy workloads and feelings of helplessness. She adds: “People felt the work
they did, their skills, and they themselves weren’t important to their
organizations” (Bardwick, p36).
6
GenY kids have grown up in this potentially negative climate, which could have
affected their personal attachment to an organization. It has been argued also
that Late Boomers and GenX parents educated their kids as “trophy kids”. This
education approach is characterized by a high level of feedback, praise and
encouragement to speak up for themselves (Alsop, 2008, p3). It might be
influencing GenY’s attitude towards institutions, their jobs, willingness to invest
time and effort and expectations of rewards gained.
Over the past 10 years, academics and consultants have covered the topic of
Millenials/Gen Y behaviors at work extensively within the western cultural
context (Twenge, 2010). However, despite the available literature and articles in
the management press (eg “Top 10 tips to manage your GenY workers”), I have
encountered a number of managers in the Singaporean corporate world puzzled
by the GenY commitment contradiction: they recognize effort and dedication of
these workers, but experience difficulties in managing longer term expectations.
Even older GenYs in management positions (25-‐30 years old) may struggle to
find effective and long lasting levers to convince their younger team members to
stay in their jobs.
The Asian context seems to have been overlooked by researchers – a gap that
should be addressed. Being the obvious, if not the only, growth region for MNCs,
and even more impacted by high turn over rates (Khatri, Fern & Budhwar, 2001),
Asia is where Talent Managers are the most concerned. For the two past decades
there has been a combination of higher growth opportunities that MNCs are
eager to benefit from, with an abundant and well educated, but inexperienced,
local workforce (relative to European and American ones) (Deloitte’s Talent
Edge 2020, January 2012). This situation has led firms to invest significantly in
the younger local workforce’s training and development, and a genuine desire to
grow such employees from within.
At the same time the demand for experienced locals is still outstripping the
supply, thus providing them with many more alternatives than staying in the
7
firm that would have groomed them in the first place. Thus, training investment
in itself is not enough to retain local talents. In fact, it may actually open doors
for these talents to seek new opportunities. Clearly, retaining talents long
enough for satisfactory returns on investment is therefore a much more complex
endeavor than what firms had experienced in Europe and the US 40 years ago.
Singapore, despite the smallness of its physical size, is the preferred location for
MNCs to set up their regional headquarters (Asia-‐Pacific Headquarter Study,
European Chamber of Commerce in China & Roland Berger, 2011). The city-‐state
produces qualified graduates through its university system -‐ a breeding ground
for a connected, tolerant and diverse generation. In Mercer’s What Works study,
Singaporean aged between 16 and 24 years old encapsulated the GenY paradox
even more so than their counterparts. On the one hand, they appeared to be
employees who should be loyal to their company: their satisfaction with their
organizations and their work exceeded the average by 12% and 11%
respectively. In fact they also surpassed the average by 15% in their likelihood to
recommend their current organizations to others as a place to work. Yet the
proportion that considered leaving the job within the next year was higher than
the average by 14%.
These findings were the highest across all developed economies highlighted in
the survey. Actually, Khatri, Fern & Budhwar (2001) explained the high turnover
rate in Singapore by a job-‐hopping attitude, culturally embedded. They discarded
satisfaction levels at work as significant predictors of turnover intentions. On the
other hand organizational commitment was found out to be the most important
factor influencing intentions to leave or stay in a firm. Therefore, investigating
the approach to professional commitment of a segment of Singapore based
workers initiating their career may enable to better understand the roots of
effective organizational commitment. This may offer new perspectives and
levers to improve selection processes and employee retention in the long run.
8
IV – Research aims and objectives
This research study investigates the perceptions of professional commitment of
16 – 24 year old Asian individuals, who are employed or about to be
permanently employed, in highly skilled professional jobs in Singapore.
Within the context of this research study, professional commitment is defined as
the act of binding oneself intellectually or emotionally to the course of action of
an organization at the micro level (role / team) or the macro level (corporation).
Distinct from engagement, it is a deeper and longer-‐lasting attitude. The length of
time in a job within a specific organization should not be the primary indicator of
professional commitment. Rather it should refer to an individual’s meaningful
attachment to the organization, which is accompanied by the perception that the
organization provides a fertile ground for effective personal and professional
growth over a long enough period of time to be beneficial for both employer and
employee.
From a philosophical point of view however, Marxist theorists have presented
employment as a form of alienation. Today, it may be represented in popular
culture as a chore and loss of oneself rather than an essential part of an
individual. For instance, the widely used term “work-‐life balance” implies that
work is not life and life is not work. Yet, as we need some form of revenue
generating activity, work constitutes most of our adult life. In today’s world,
corporate employment is a reality that many of us have to face. Looking into how
one can find alignment between our personal motivation and workplace
commitment may offer a counter argument to this suspicion of alienation.
The research will delve into Singaporean GenY professionals’ perception and
experience of professional commitment. Exploring their decision making process
related to professional commitment in the overall context of adulthood
transition will allow to identify underlying commitment drivers, and separate
extrinsic factors from intrinsic ones. More specifically, the research study
addressed the following questions:
9
-‐ How do Singaporean GenYs perceive and interpret professional
commitment?
-‐ To what extent do they value this concept, personally and collectively?
-‐ What intrinsically enables the youngest of GenYs to experience genuine and
long lasting commitment in the workplace?
The result could provide invaluable insights to managers, talent managers, HR
practitioners and consultants/coaches, and thus improve their understanding, of
GenY professionals work attitudes and behaviors. Effective managerial and
behavioral intervention opportunities could then be implemented to increase the
professional commitment of this group of employees.
V -‐ Literature review
In this chapter, the fundamental theories related to professional commitment,
and the concept of self-‐determination as a key enabler of this commitment will
be discussed. To better approach GenYs, life stage development theory will be
covered, as well as research findings related to cultural or generational effects.
Defining commitment
The concept of commitment within a professional setting has been covered
extensively in Organizational Behavior research (Meyer, Allen, 1997, xi), often
cited as “ organizational commitment”, that emphasizes one’s attachment
towards the organization. In 1991, Meyer and Allen defined organizational
commitment as “a psychological state that characterizes the employee’s
relationship with the organization, and has implications for the decision to
continue or discontinue membership in the organization,” (p67). They
highlighted three distinct components: affective commitment, continuance
commitment and normative commitment (Meyer, Allen, 1991).
10
1. The affective commitment refers to a desire to be within the organization.
Such a desire stems from work experiences that satisfy employee needs.
Specifically, there are two types of experiences that appear to be
significantly correlated with affective commitment:
a. Employee’s comfort within the organization (eg. role clarity,
freedom of conflict, equity in reward and distribution, and
organizational support) and
b. Feeling of competence in the work role (eg. accomplishment,
autonomy, performance based records, job challenges, and
opportunities for advancement).
2. Continuance commitment refers to a need to remain within the
organization, due to two main factors: a) perceived lack of alternatives
and b) the cost of leaving is too high exceeding what has been invested in
this professional setting.
3. Lastly, normative commitment refers to an obligation to remain within
the organization. Normative commitment may result from the
internalization of normative pressures (eg. Familial expectations, prior to
entry; or organizational socialization after entry), or the existence of
material bonds, such as the need to repay tuition fees.
These three components are present at various degrees in each individual’s
approach to commitment. This approach sheds light onto the diverse motives
underlying an employee’s emotional and/or intellectual attachment to work.
Thus it constitutes a solid framework for analyzing the findings of my research
study.
Figure 1 presents the first version of what I call the ‘commitment landscape
scheme’ – my conceptualization of the thought and emotional processes that
influence an employee’s professional commitment. In the course of this chapter,
as I incorporate additional related theories, I will be building upon this first
11
version of the commitment landscape scheme to capture the full extent of the
complexity of the mental processes related to professional commitment.
Figure 1. Commitment Landscape Scheme 1: Three types of professional
commitment
Intrinsic Motivation, a Foundation for Professional Commitment
The above Commitment Landscape may combine a complexity of factors. Each
individual is specifically transacting with the organization their personal efforts
and attachment against benefits depending on one’s specific needs. Therefore
the exploration of motivation theories could provide insights into the rationales
at play in this internal negotiation process, and the shift towards a committed
mindset.
Fundamental motivation theories stem from Abraham Maslow’s “Pyramid of
Needs”, a hierarchy of needs that comprises the following levels -‐ safety, love,
self-‐esteem and self-‐actualization needs (cited in Staw, 1977). Individuals use
their cognitive capacities (perceptual, intellectual, learning) to adjust to their
environment and seek satisfaction of their needs. Once satisfied, each level of
needs gives way to the next.
12
In the developed world, where physiological and safety needs are broadly
speaking fulfilled, individuals would primarily seek to satisfy their “love” needs
(sense of belonging, membership), followed by their “esteem” needs
(achievement and recognition), and lastly “self-‐actualization” needs (self-‐
fulfillment or reaching one’s own potential). With regards to work, this quest to
satisfy one’s needs may influence one’s professional commitment at a
transactional level (eg. “Is my esteem need satisfied in this role?”). However, this
approach does not allow to identify intrinsic motivators among all needs to be
satisfied. As developed below, intrinsic motivational factors appear to be key in
effective work performance and essential to today’s professional landscape.
Organizational behavior researchers found out that optimal work and
productivity experience actually originated from the intrinsic motivation of
individuals. According to theory Y (MacGregor, 1960) and theory Z (Ouchi,
1981), individuals may reach even a higher level of effectiveness and genuine
engagement, when they had greater opportunities to be autonomous and to
develop competencies in a trusting and safe environment… to the point of
lifelong employment.
Today, in this uncertain economic climate, with predominantly non-‐permanent
employment conditions, firms may not be able to provide a consistently secure
environment that allows intrinsic motivation to flourish. As Kissler pointed out
in his article “The New Employment Contract” (Kissler, 1994), the concept of
trust between employers and employee has shifted from a paternal and secure
model to “agreements made between adults as to what needs to be done –
agreements that answer the often unstated question: what’s in it for me?” (p
337).
Such a shift emphasizes even more the necessity for an individual to build by
himself an intrinsic motivation to work. In an contractual relationship with an
organization that does not provide guarantees (or weaker guarantees) for a
secure employment, one will only be certain of one resource to thrive on: his
13
own personal willingness and energy to progress. In this context, for firms,
employee empowerment goes beyond autonomy and trust. It is about helping
them move to a higher psychological mindset “where they are solely responsible
for determining their identity as well as their worth” (Kissler, 1994, p339).
Another key evolution is the shift from a manufacturing society to an
information society. This trend has imposed new demands on the psychological
resources of employees: greater capacity for innovation, self-‐management,
personal responsibility, and self-‐direction (Brendan, 1995). Against this
backdrop, cultivating an intrinsic motivation towards work and a commitment
based on this intrinsic motivation become key to professional success, and
indirectly to organizational performance.
Self-‐Determination as a Process of Commitment Building
To further understand how intrinsic motivation develops, Leci and Ryan (1985)
developed a model of intrinsic motivation and self-‐determination. In this model,
human motivation is based on fulfilling three innate psychological needs: self-‐
determination, competence and interpersonal relatedness.
Autonomy orientation
Individuals, as they grow in maturity and build up their sense of self, are capable
to absorb and integrate a selection of standards and external controls as their
own, in a conscious choice process. Ultimately, through these processes, one
experiences a consistency between their behaviors, thoughts, feeling and needs -‐
“organismic congruence” (Leci, Ryan, 1985, p154). Congruent individuals are
therefore able to absorb environmental elements as informational and make
conscious decisions and accommodations to their environment, to fulfill their
innate psychological needs. Individuals with organismic congruence are
predominantly autonomy oriented.
Control Orientation
14
At the same time, individuals may also be sensitive to external standards and a
pressure to perform, without exercising a genuinely self-‐determined choice. In
such instances, they achieve cognitive consistency by rationalizing and aligning
their thoughts with their actions and controls. When self-‐worth is linked to
performance on externally defined controls and standards, individuals may
become heavily ego-‐involved in performing well, thus undermining intrinsic
motivation. While this accommodation enables to function, this approach denies
one’s sense of self and places the demands of the environment ahead of one’s
own needs and feelings: Leci and Ryan (1985) denominate it as a “control
orientation” (p 157).
Impersonal Orientation
A third configuration is the impersonal orientation (p 159), based on a perceived
incompetence to deal with life’s challenges, both internal and external.
Individuals with a dominant impersonal orientation may be unable to cope when
facing external forces, or experience difficulties in managing their thoughts and
emotions, leading them to behave without intentions. The impersonal
orientation is the extreme version of a non-‐self determined behavior.
According to Leci and Ryan, these orientations are personality traits: each
individual may possess them, in varying degrees. In this research study,
identifying the orientation mix of young Singaporean may yield interesting
insights in the process of commitment building.
One could integrate the three orientations, namely autonomy, control and
impersonal, to Meyer and Allen’s (1991) three components of commitment, as
shown in the Figure 2 below:
15
Figure 2. Commitment Landscape Scheme 2: Three orientations
As shown in the figure above, there are affinities between the Affective
commitment (“this is what I want to do”) and the autonomy orientation (“this is
what fits me”) as well as the reinforcing effects on comfort and competence (“I
am choosing this role/organization because it helps me to develop my own
competence”). Similarly the control orientation may come into play when an
individual commits to an organization to satisfy his family expectations
(normative commitment). Finally, an individual who perceives no other
professional alternative to his current job may find himself in a situation in
which he does not control, an ‘impersonal’ situation.
Further analysis may uncover more complex links and contingencies between
these elements, as in any case these three orientations and commitment
components are present all at one time, at varying degrees.
Experiencing Work as a Flow
Moving beyond finding one’s organismic congruence and optimal
accommodation with one’s working environment, an individual may seek to
16
experience work as a “flow”, an optimal psychological experience. To achieve
“flow” one will structure one’s mind and attention towards progressive
intellectual challenges and growth. It is possible to identify in job tasks these
achievable yet challenging objectives and enjoy the process more than the
outcome (Csíkszentmihályi, 1991). Ultimately, individuals who are able to
consistently focus their consciousness to achieve “Flow” are qualified as autotelic
personalities. Autotelic personalities are not transacting between satisfactory or
unsatisfactory conditions of work. Instead, they are shaping what applies
optimally to their own consciousness, as they are committed primarily to their
own well being rather than the setting in which they work.
In the figure below the components of work enabling an individual to experience
“flow” are underlined onto our ‘commitment landscape scheme’: these elements
may be specifically sought by autotelic personalities or may favorably influence
the emergence of an autotelic mindset at work:
Figure 3. Commitment Landscape Scheme 3: Autotelic elements.
17
In this quest for intrinsic motivators towards professional commitment, we can
see above that autotelic elements are in the realm of affective commitment and
related to the job performed, rather than the organizational setting.
From an organizational point of view, firms may leverage on designing jobs with
autotelic features to provide flow experiences and indirectly stimulate
professional commitment. Csíkszentmihályi points out however that both
creating an environment favorable to flow and guiding individuals to recognize
how their can orient their consciousness towards flow would be necessary. In
the context of this research study, interviews might reveal how “flow” factors are
being perceived and leveraged by our GenYs.
In the Background of GenYs : Early Adulthood Life-‐Stage
The specific life stage where of GenY participants is evidently an important
consideration for this research study. From the perspective of the stages of life,
16 to 25 years olds occupy a bridging stage between the childhood and
adulthood, specifically identified by Levinson (1986) as a cross-‐era transition,
the “Early Adult transition” (17-‐22 years old) (Levinson, 1986, p5).
When individuals move from their childhood foundation to build a new life
structure in their adulthood, they are creating a new boundary between their
personality structure and the social structure and a base for adult living. This
process is both intrinsically difficult and contradictory. It combines a wide
exploration of various options, to keep as open as possible, with a desire to settle
in a stable structure, form new memberships and lasting ties. It seeks to fulfill
one’s core values beyond the initial setting of one’s family. It is not difficult to see
how work constitutes a key pillar of this new life structure, as it determines one’s
future and offers a means for independence.
One can thus integrate the concept of life-‐structure building with the three
components of commitment in considering the findings of this research study.
For example, affective commitment may be more important (being part of a team
18
and getting positive performance feedback), in reinforcing the life structure
being built. On the other hand, continuance commitment (having potentially
more job alternatives, or having a smaller investment within the firm than senior
colleagues) might not play as much in their commitment building process as
their career choices may still be considered as flexible and thus changeable.
Normative commitment may come into play if individuals have benefited from
scholarships or are strongly influenced by external standards.
Another perspective to take into account is that our 16 to 24 years old
participants are transferring from a predictable, protected and unconditionally
loving familial setting, to a transactional and non-‐permanent corporate setting.
When commitment to the first might appear evident and may not even be
questioned, a young individual is likely to question the value of committing to
one specific organization. New uncertainties and choices appear, that they have
to process mostly by themselves.
On the other hand, if one were to incorporate the self-‐determination theory and
the three orientations, the life structure building process would then be
considered to be a phase of growth of the autonomy orientation. Individuals
build a life for themselves, beyond family controls and confirm their adult
personality. This life phase may be a critical period to internalize external
standards for oneself (less “control” orientation) and/or realize that one can
make decision for oneself (less ”impersonal orientation”).
Mindset: From the Socializing Mind to the Self-‐Authored Mind
Building a life structure is a highly social activity, growing out of the engagement
of the self in the world. According to Kegan (1994), to support this transition, the
mind grows in complexity up until 20 years old to reach a “socialized mind”, that
is able to process the transactions to which it is now exposed. However, to reach
intrinsic motivation in today’s Information Society, the mind may even need to
reach a higher level of complexity, as “self-‐authoring”. A self-‐authoring mind is
primed to filter information in view of one self’s priorities. As GenY are digital
19
natives and thus exposed to the Information Society and its demands, it was
interesting to determine whether the participants of the research study
indicated a potential transition between to socialized mind and the self-‐
authoring mind.
Cultural Influences on Mindset
In modern Singapore, Western economic principles are juxtaposed to the Asian
cultural setting. Beyond cultural descriptions, it is interesting for this research
study to take into account potential mindset differences between Westerners
and Asians, and understand if Singaporean GenY have adopted a western
mindset or compounded it with the Asian mindset. According to Richard Nisbett
(2003), a key difference between Asian and Westerners is that the former tends
to adopt a holistic view of the world, while the latter has a predominantly
individualistic approach. As a result, Westerners possess an innate sense of
personal agency, with the expectation that they can manipulate their
environment for their benefit. On the other hand, Asians primarily think from a
collective and harmonious perspective. They will pay more attention to the
context of a situation and tend to adjust to conditions, rather than change them.
They should feel less the need to be in control than Westerners. Additionally,
they will need to feel part of a network of relationships and to attain collective
achievement (Nisbett, 2003).
With regards to the participants of my research study, both the Western and
Asian tendencies may play a role in influencing how they choose to build their
new life structure and their sense of commitment.
Global and Local Generational findings
Another angle to understand the mindset of GenYs is to explore generational
studies, specifically the ones related to work attitudes across Boomers (1946-‐
1964), Gen X (1965-‐1980) and GenYs (1980-‐2000). Jean Twenge (2010)
20
specifically focused on GenY work values, as a means to determine their innate
needs, by compiling time-‐lag studies available up to 2010. Time-‐lag studies
enable researchers to distinguish generational effects from life stage effects, as
opposed to cross-‐sectional studies1 conducted by many consultancies nowadays.
Here are some interesting conclusions that Twenge drew from her analysis of
GenYs:
1. Work centrality has declined, as well as work ethics. They have less
interest than previous generations in working hard, putting in overtime
and taking pride in their work.
2. A small decline in the intrinsic value of work is also observed, whilst the
extrinsic value of work appears to have less importance than GenX
individuals (eg. money, status).
3. No specific differences were observed in altruistic work values. Theories
that younger generations seek meaning in work have not yet been
supported by academic research.
4. These studies confirmed the GenY contradiction: while they were more
satisfied with their job and desired more job security than older
generations in the past, but they also seemed to be more open to outside
opportunities.
5. Twenge confirmed GenY’s individualism and greater narcissism (inflated
sense of self) than previous generations, accompanied by sense of
entitlement. Roberts, Edmonds and Grijalva (2010), in a concurrent meta-‐
analysis focused on narcissism, argue however that it is related to life-‐
stage development, and not a generational effect.
Kau, Jung, Tambyah and Tan in their overall study Understanding Singaporeans
(2004) indicated that 15-‐24 years old Singaporeans rated highly family values
(4.71/6, second highest score per age group), followed by materialism (4.37/6,
highest score), entrepreneurship (4.24/6), societal consciousness (4.12/6, third
score), and status consciousness (4.01/6, highest score). Traditionalism
1 Cross-‐sectional studies survey the three different generational cohorts and compare results, at a certain point in time, while time-‐lag studies involve a
21
appeared at the second lowest score of all generations, behind 25 to 34 years old
(4.06/6).
They further indicate that for this age group having “warm relationships with
others” is considered as important or very important for 74% of them, “Self-‐
fulfillment” (72,9%) and “Self-‐respect” (71,8%) were respectively their second
and third most important personal values. In fourth spot, “Fun and Enjoyment in
Life” scored 71,7%, almost 12% above the average for all Singaporeans. The
three least valued personal values were “Sense of belonging” (58,2%),
“Excitement” (63%) and “Security” (64,1%).
Lastly, these young Singaporean aspired primarily to health, happiness and
friendship. Security, freedom and success came in 4th, 5th and 6th position, while
wealth, power and social status came in 12th, 13th and 14th position.
This literature review clarified professional commitment in the context of being
intrinsically motivated to commit to a job and an organization. It highlighted the
life stage building phase in which our GenYs are currently evolving as being the
overall life context surrounding professional commitment. Lastly, it provided an
overall picture of GenYs life and work values, according to recent academic
research.
VI -‐ Methodology
Methodological overall approach and underlying assumptions
In this research study, my own experience of professional commitment needs to
be explained. Identifying my own understanding and experience of commitment
allows me to better understand my interviewees’ views and experiences on the
topic. For me, starting a career proceeded heavily from perceived family
expectations to enter a secure career and climb the corporate ladder. The
European economic crisis and a strong push for work-‐life balance in government
22
owned companies encouraged me to start in the protected and predictable
setting of a “job-‐for-‐life” firm. Within that firm I experienced a strong
commitment to my roles and environment, almost feeling as if I was building a
new identity as a member of its staff. Knowing that the firm would keep me until
retirement, I was felt strongly loyal to it. Philippe d’Iribarne (1979) observed
that the French were particularly taking pride in committing to their tasks and
role within an organization, beyond the specific terms of their roles. I actually
experienced this myself, and observed differences in that approach in other
cultural settings. Today, considering the “New Contract” terms and working in a
volatile professional environment, I still think that commitment is a desirable
feature of any employment. However, I am looking for intrinsic factors in
building that commitment, rather than the cultural or normative factors I
experienced myself at the onset of my career.
To date, a number of quantitative studies have offered views on GenY’s
behaviors. However these research studies have been based on pre-‐formulated
questions that fail to capture the subtleties of respondents’ feelings and inner
thoughts. Given this critical limitation of quantitative studies, I chose to employ a
qualitative ethnographic research to capture the emotional and intellectual
essence of responses behind these numbers.
A fundamental assumption underlying the ethnographic approach is that reality
is shaped by humans’ perceptions and interactions in their world. Generational
cohorts are considered as “identifiable groups sharing birth years, age, locations,
and significant life events” (Kupperschmidt, 2000, p 65) and therefore constitute
a distinct group of people potentially shaping the reality in their own way.
Capturing a generation’s perspectives, thoughts and emotions on professional
commitment will help to identify opportunities for improvement in the
corporate world.
In the background, three fundamental values are driving my research:
-‐ The respect and support for distinct cultures,
-‐ The belief in the effectiveness of collaboration,
23
-‐ The belief in the existence of improvement opportunities for all parties.
Laying ground for the research
To approach the topic of this research study, and in parallel with conducting the
literature review, I attended two one-‐off workshops:
-‐ A “Question-‐storming” with interns and graduate permanent hires from my
firm: I asked them to brainstorm on all the questions that I could ask to the
interviewees, related to professional commitment. This allowed to identify
areas of concern, as spontaneously expressed by the group, and to see how
best my interview questions could be phrased. The outcome of this question-‐
storming is available in Appendix A.
-‐ An intercultural theater workshop with students from ESSEC (French
business school, Ecole Superieure des Sciences Economiques et
Commerciales), which theme was “Commitment in the workplace”.
Happening once a month on the ESSEC campus, the initial purpose of this
intercultural workshop is to allow students from various origins to discover
each other’s cultures, and especially have a view on Singapore specificities.
Nanyang Technological University, National University of Singapore and
Singapore Management University students are invited to join ESSEC
undergrad and postgraduate students, all on a voluntary basis. The ESSEC
group turned out to be extremely varied in age (undergrads and mature MBA
students with prior experience up to 30 years old) and from various
nationalities (French, Latin American, North Americans, Indians, Chinese).
Unfortunately, only one Singaporean student turned up, which did not allow
for a proper focus on the Singaporean approach. Participants were asked to
improvise a recruitment interview where employers would unknowingly
deter a candidate to pursue his application. This led to a facilitated discussion
on their personal drivers and blocks with regards to employment conditions
at the onset of their career. I did not participate directly, but observed and
captured findings out of this experience, available in Appendix B. Mainly I
24
was able to identify four elements: the fear of isolation, the taboo of money,
the focus on “doing” rather than “learning”, and an individualistic approach of
work in Western participants, while Asian participants were more sensitive
to the collective approach.
Collecting and analyzing the data
The data has been collected from in-‐depth semi-‐structured interviews with 15
Singapore-‐based GenYs to elicit their perceptions of professional commitment.
The theoretical framework of commitment, self-‐determination in professional
commitment building and findings of generational studies and Asian specificities,
as outlined in the literature review, were used to analyze the research findings.
While this research study would not be able to provide a fully representative
picture of the level of professional commitment of Singaporean GenYs, their
narratives and rationales would offer an in-‐depth understanding of the cognitive
and the emotional processes that shape the professional commitment of
Singapore GenYs.
VII – Description of the research setting
Fifteen Singaporean GenY individuals, aged from 18 to 26 years old participated
in this research study. They were all graduates of Singapore universities. While
some were already working, the rest of the group was about to enter the
workforce. University graduates are specifically sought after by MNCs’ Campus
Recruiters, with a view to grow them to management positions, which implies a
degree of professional commitment.
To gain access to a pool of potential candidates for this research study I tapped
into my personal network of existing mentors of fresh graduates, including
INSEAD CCC colleagues, university career centers, and a personal network of
25
fresh graduates. Moreover to encourage participation, a donation of 30 SGD was
made to a Cambodian-‐based charity.
I had initially sought to obtain an equal number of male and female participants
with a wide spectrum of degrees targeted by corporations in order to elicit
diverse perspectives. I established an initial sample of desirable degrees, based
on the number of 2012 graduates in major areas of knowledge (Table 1):
Domain Number (MOE 2012) % Sample Engineering sciences 3891 34.72% 5 Humanities and social
sciences 2480 22.13% 3 Natural physical and math
sciences 1836 16.38% 2 Business Administration 1577 14.07% 2
Accountancy 839 7.49% 1 Information technology 583 5.20% 1
Total 11206 100.00% 15 Fig. 4 2012 repartition of graduates per area of study in Singapore, 2012 – source
Singapore Ministry of Education.
It included at least 16% of foreign students, as communicated by the MOE2.
However, due to time and access constraints my sample did not fully achieve this
balance.
In this setting, I have been careful of the following potential ethical and
methodological issues:
-‐ I communicated the purpose of my study clearly to the participants, and
preserved their anonymity. They have access to the final research report.
-‐ Issues of power imbalances between my participants and me were averted,
as I eliminated candidates who were directly linked to my HR role. As I could
exert a potential impact, however minimal, on the careers of these
employees, I deliberately choose not to seek their participation in the
research study.
2 Parliamentary replies, Oct 16, 2012 (http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-‐replies/2012/10/foreign-‐students-‐in-‐local-‐auto.php)
26
-‐ Finally, two factors that might have skewed the findings towards a more
positive slant on the concept of professional commitment should be noted: 1)
participants’ willingness to spend more than an hour to meet and discuss the
matter, and 2) the introduction via mentor, which indicated a potentially
increased self-‐awareness and more articulated outlook on the world of work.
However, this led to articulate and thoughtful approaches, enabling to
identify variables and factors in building this commitment.
I conducted semi-‐structured interviews, lasting between one hour and one hour
and half. I first built a qualitative interview guide through fundamentals of
human development and intrinsic motivation research findings, initial hints and
findings obtained through the question storming and intercultural workshops.
The sequence of questions is designed to explore what place work and
commitment to it have in their lives and current decision process as they build
this adulthood life structure.
The interview questions were organized under the following sections:
The first set of questions were designed to focus the participants on their own
thinking and feelings, as opposed to expectations from their immediate
environment that might have primed their responses:
• How were your parents committed to their work?
• How does it differ from your approach of professional commitment and the
context you are in today?
• Describe a dream work experience for you: the role, the place, the colleagues,
and the boss? How would it look like? How would it feel like?
Next, participants were asked to discuss the value of work to them and its role in
their endeavor to build a new life structure:
• To what extent is work a part of who you are, your identity?
• What does “working hard” mean for you?
• What do you find difficult to manage in your work life or career prospects
right now? How does it compare to other areas of your life?
27
Thirdly, I explored with them the process of committing into a job:
• What are the 3 most important factors when choosing a job?
• What do you find important when learning a job? What helps you?
• What makes you decide to quit a job?
Fourth, the participants were asked to offer their perceptions of the experience
of being committed into a job:
• What does it mean to be committed at work?
• What do you expect for yourself in the environment you work in? (the
organization, your manager, your colleagues)
• And what do you think the environment is expecting from you?
• What conditions would need to be in place for you to feel fully committed
to your job?
• What do you think are the pros and cons of professional commitment, for
you and the organization?
• Situation: You have set up a romantic 1-‐week holiday in Europe with your
potential lifetime partner. The day before you leave, your boss tells you
that an important has client asked for an urgent service proposal. You
would have to stay back to put it together and attend meetings with the
client on the very week you were supposed to be away. This proposal will
have an impact on the business revenues, your performance review and
career prospects. At the same time, the holiday is non-‐refundable, and
your partner was really looking forward to it. What would you do? What
factors would you consider in making your decision?
The final set of questions is designed to explore their awareness and view on
potential generational differences on the topic of professional commitment:
• What’s your view on the commitment of your older colleagues?
• Your generation is seen as volatile and less committed to work than older
ones. What’s your view on this perception?
28
All but one interview were recorded and later on fully transcribed, amounting to
138 pages of data.
VIII – Findings and analysis
In this section, findings gathered from these one-‐on-‐one interviews will be
presented. The findings are organized under the following themes:
• Theme 1: Interviewee’s perceptions of their environment at a macro level
(Singapore and economic context) and micro level (family and parents);
• Theme 2: Interviewees’ ideal vision of work, specifically their dreams;
• Theme 3: Interviewees’ valuation of their professional life within the
larger context of their overall lives;
• Theme 4: Interviewees’ process of entering their work life, how they
chose to join or quit a particular job; and
• Theme 5: Interviewees’ perception of professional commitment.
Description of interviewees
Fifteen interviewees – six women and nine men, from 18 to 28 years old –
participated in the interview. Below is a table (Table 2) summarizing their main
characteristics:
Table 2 Interviewees’ summary of main characteristics
29
Twelve were Singaporean citizens, three were foreigners from Malaysia, Vietnam
and China. Four come from a working class background, with five and six
participants coming from a lower middle class and upper middle class
background respectively.
Except for one interviewee, all others had either graduated (four interviewees)
from major Singapore-‐based universities (namely NTU, SMU, NUS, and SIM) or
are still attending these institutions – among the remaining ten, seven are in
their final year of study and in the process of securing a full time employment.
The youngest interviewee had completed Junior College and intended to pursue
Humanities.
In terms of work experience, only one interviewee had never had formal work
experience (apart from giving tuition). Ten interviewees had at least completed
two internships, with at least one in a multi-‐national corporation.
Among the four graduates, two had already resigned from their first full time job
after just one year, one out of a clear misalignment with her personality and life
aspirations, the other to seek career advancement through greater
responsibilities. As for the two others, one was completing an additional
internship overseas, while the other had found full time employment overseas
but had not seen is work visa confirmed by the authorities and had to return to
Singapore to find a new role.
Interviews took place at locations selected by the participants:
-‐ Cafes around town (5),
-‐ NTU Student Activity Center (5),
-‐ INSEAD Campus (2),
-‐ Participant’s workplace (1),
-‐ Skype (1).
As seen above, almost all participants wished to meet in a public and open space.
The NTU Student Activity Center is probably the most representative of the
30
environment undergraduates are transitioning from when entering the
workplace, and thus grabbed specifically my attention. Newly built, it combines a
study zone, a TV viewing zone, a pool and video game zone, and a Starbuck
Coffee counter. With modern design features, the place is bustling with noise and
activity at any time of the day, for study or casual meetings. In the Singapore
heat, this air-‐conditioned and free-‐entry area seems to be the preferred meeting
point of various groups. Its relative coziness contrasted with the massive and
lifeless look of the University buildings.
7 interviewees dressed casually, whilst 5 were smart casual, and 3 dressed
formally mostly for work purpose. In any case, the invitation for interview
highlighted the relaxed tone of the meeting, and was not prompting a formal way
of dressing up. Interviewees demonstrated a clear interest in the topic discussed
and a genuine willingness to share their views. Interestingly, only 2 interviewees
kept their hand phone close and consequently were interrupted by it once or
twice during the discussion. This was a pleasant surprise for me: be it in the
workplace or in public spaces, I have observed that hand phones are rarely
hidden away, and I was expecting such interruptions to happen more often
during the interviews. Overall, the interviewees demonstrated a good ability to
focus on the questions asked.
How GenYs perceive their environment and expectations
In this section, the interviewees’ perceptions of their external environment are
explored. For the foreigners in particular, Singapore was perceived as “a good
place to start” (Interviewee L) -‐ a clean, structured and efficient place, with high
quality education, more freedom and better opportunities compared to their
home country (Interviewee L). At the same time, all three foreigners stated that
they did not intend to stay in Singapore for life. One felt somehow stifled by the
highly structured, homogeneous and small setting of the Lion City (Interviewee
L), another hoped to explore the world further (Interviewee O), and lastly the
last one quoted Australia as a possible destination (Interviewee D).
31
High living standards were a recurrent theme for the interviewees. Interviewee
G mentioned: “You need practicality in Singapore”, implying that a good
compensation would be needed to cover her life needs (living in a condominium,
having a car…). However, the Singaporeans were not expecting to leave the
family nest on their first job, and therefore their first salary did not have to cover
all their needs immediately. It is interesting to note here that even though
earning a good salary was seen as key to long-‐term life goals, it might not be
immediately critical to them.
For some locals, the competitive and hard working mindset was experienced as a
given fact of Singapore and a potential source of unhappiness (Interviewees K, Z,
M). There was a visible paradox at play. Competition and hard work constituted
for them the reason they managed to enter a prestigious university, which would
lead to satisfying life prospects. On the other hand, they seemed to resent the
long working hours (Interviewee A, G), the expectation of results (Interviewee
K), and some are not daring to dream by fear of failure (Interviewee A, G). This
resentment may be symptomatic in their approach of major economic
institutions: government jobs were perceived as dead end jobs stifled by
bureaucracy, red tape, and unnecessary KPIs to fulfill (Interviewees I, K and O).
While big firms presented opportunities for exploration (Interviewee B, L), some
interviewees felt that the type of jobs offered at junior levels were repetitive,
predictable and not fully using their capacities (Interviewees A, C, F, N),
ultimately jobs in which they would be replaceable “by a foreign talent or a
machine” (Interviewee F). Interviewee C expressed similar pessimism at her job
prospects: “I do see jobs yes, but not the ones that make a career”.
She further noted that the regulatory set up of Singapore was partial to
companies, thus enabling them to downsize easily. As a result, it does not elicit a
culture of respect for the employee. Some interviewees who had served
internships in prestigious MNCs (F, G, H, N) questioned whether a long-‐term
career path existed for them, based on their observation that the most
prestigious entry jobs were reserved for the elite of their university or MBAs.
32
Moreover, in some instances (G, N) senior roles were filled from overseas
employees rather than individuals cultivated within the local entities.
When discussing their parent’s approach to their work and career, seven
interviewees noted that they did not have many choices at the time (A, B, G, H, K,
M, N), be it for mere survival or accessing higher living standards. Five
interviewees viewed their parent’s commitment to work as a search for stability
and economical comfort (A, B, E, K, N). None of them described their parents as
being passionate, or driven by their passion for work.
When discussing the influence their parents had on them in choosing a degree
and a career, almost all participants indicated that they had not sought to
prescribe specifically their future. Only interviewee D was forced to pursue an
Accountancy degree at university -‐ the “Iron Rice Bowl”. According to
interviewees from the working class background, they had already fulfilled their
parents’ expectations by attending university. Thus their parents did not put
pressure on them with regards to their professional future. As for the middle
class interviewees, some (K, M) were grateful for their parents “generosity” in
letting them choose their path and supporting them in their first steps in the
world of work. Interviewee F highlighted the privilege of having a safety net at
home, which thus allowed him to explore more risky options, like
entrepreneurship. On the other side he also pointed out, as interviewee I, that
this sheltered environment may have at times prevented him to be fully
prepared for the outer world. Two interviewees (K, J) highlighted the necessity
of an on-‐going dialogue with them: “You are giving them the peace of mind that
you are not wasting your life away” (Interviewee J).
In summary, interviewees felt that they have today more choices than their
parents had and a more favorable economic environment to play in. Moreover
they have the opportunity to decide by themselves on a career path and life
options. On the other hand, they do not seem certain that the career options
offered to them would necessarily lead to their full satisfaction.
33
Chasing the Dream
For the interviewees from working class backgrounds, a stable and well paid job
in an MNC would help to provide for a “cushy lifestyle” (Interviewee L, G). Yet
there were other interviewees (E, J, L) who sought to find their “calling”, their
niche in order to achieve success with a full alignment with themselves.
When asked about their “dream work experience” interviewees came up with a
limited set of specific roles: entrepreneur, consultant, and senior executive.
Others expressed what they would like to do: innovate, create, make “tangible
things that change people’s lives (Interviewee J), or “write books to inspire
people” (Interviewee E). Interviewee N clearly expressed his goal of owning his
business: “Something where I can set my own direction”. The theme of
ownership emerged consistently across his interview. Most interviewees (12)
grounded themselves in the realm of the possible, rather than a fantasy. The
three interviewees (C, L, G) who did explore work prospects that were not so
easily attainable cited philanthropy, arts, a “jetset” role in the luxury business, or
the creation of a small business. However, interviewees L and G were also
concerned about the high probability of failure or the need to have another
source of income to ensure their ability to support themselves.
In this ideal work setting, most interviewees highlighted the importance of being
listened to and trusted. They would like opportunities to demonstrate their
skillset and to be challenged in their work. Delivering tangible output and seeing
the fruit of their labor was also important to the interviewees’ sense of
fulfillment (Interviewees B, C, E, J, K, L, M). It appeared also linked to their
professional identity, which was captured in interviewee’s L assertion: “I want to
get my hands down to the real process so I am a qualified engineer”.
Additional perks would be the opportunities to meet people outside the firm,
network and travel, mostly as a way to explore more career and life options
(Interviewees H, L, M). This particular aspect appears logical, given their current
transition to adulthood and the necessity to explore as many options as possible.
34
All interviewees desired a friendly and warm atmosphere with their colleagues,
without conflicts. Interviewee A summed it up by saying: “Having good friends in
the workplace can make things easier: you can enjoy the experience even if the
environment is bad”. Most emphasized the importance of a caring and human
organizational setting (Interviewees A, B, C, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, O). Some stated their
preference for “small team” environment (Interviewees C, D, E, J). The quality
and work ethic of colleagues were also considered to be important by
interviewees D, E, I, J, K, L and M. Their boss ought to be inspirational and
motivational (K), sometimes more a mentor than a boss (Interviewee B), with
high standards for his team and encouraging novelty and innovation
(Interviewee K). Interviewees H and E expressed a desire to experience a
genuine friendship with him/her.
Thought Process on Career Choice
Most interviewees processed their university degree choice without much
intervention from their parents, which was also the case with regards to their
career choice. It seemed as though the career choice phase was somewhat a
lonely and more daunting phase than previous life choices they had to make.
First, as the interviewees perceived a wider array of choice in front of them than
their parents had (B, H, K, L, N), some want to keep their options open as long as
possible (B, K, L, M). Finding information and making sense of it was considered
complex and unreliable (K, J, I). These interviewees quoted information
asymmetry, the uncertain accuracy of a recruitment process to assess a
company, the use of stereotypes and hear-‐say to base their decisions.
For interviewees B, F, I, K, L and M, experimenting through rotations, projects, or
a consulting assignment was considered as the best tool to choose a career path:
“I am a firm believer that as long as I experiment lots I would find the right
opportunity and I would do well in that place that I chose to be” (Interviewee K).
Interviewee L admitted: “I am waiting for a call, opportunities will come
spontaneously and I can change before I am 30”: it somehow highlights the idea
35
of GenYs expecting opportunities to come to them in a work environment
providing variety, rather than them specifically creating these experimental
opportunities.
When examining the responses of the most senior interviewees (graduates and
undergraduates in final year), it appears that internships effectively provided
them some perspectives and pointers as to what roles and work environment
suited them best. However, these interviewees perceived the stakes to be higher
for full time employment than for internships. Interviewees currently applying
for full time roles cited their concern about the large consequences implied by a
career decision (Interviewee G), or the risk of being stuck for the long term in an
unsatisfying setting (Interviewee A). Interviewees A, H, and I expressed a
potential discomfort at navigating the different campus recruitment processes
they were involved in. Some (H and I) had to cast a wide net with their
applications to secure a role and were not comfortable with the idea of having to
renege an earlier offer if a better one was to come along.
Overall, the interviewees displayed two types of attitudes towards the task of
choosing a career. First, the least risky, choosing to adapt to what is being offered
or immediately accessible, “being easy” and hope that “I will not mind the work
being given and grow to love it” (Interviewee G). A part of this attitude was about
adopting the path of least resistance -‐ the obvious choice, with concrete and
predictable options, even if it does not elicit a passion for the work (Interviewee
A). Another one, as mentioned above, consists in applying to roles offered to
graduates on campus and hoping to end up in a good organization, while
identifying the uncertain match between their personality and what the firms
would offer (Interviewee H). There was a pattern of reaction to what is available,
and less willingness to dig deep into one’s inner desires as a reference point to
evaluate the environment and options.
Six of the interviewees from diverse social background adopted a second attitude
– one that focused on personal goals and criteria as the first priority (D, E, F, J, N,
O). Interviewee J considered his job search as a quest to find his niche. For him,
36
as for interviewee E, his work had to satisfy him and yield something tangible
and adding value. In the case of interviewee N, he expressed a strong desire to
own his own business in the long run. He intended to make use of use of his
experience in SME corporate environments to build up his business management
skillset. Contrasting with the above attitude of minimizing the risk associated
with career choices, interviewee F was ready to take much greater professional
risks for the much greater reward of achieving success in his entrepreneurial
venture. By evaluating the gain in new skills and competencies acquired through
his business venture he had defined his own idea of achievement, and positioned
it at a much bigger scale than just starting a career in a corporate environment.
Interviewee H had initially accepted a primary teacher position, offered to her by
campus recruiters. After a year on the role, she had identified that this career
was not aligned with her character and spirituality and resigned. She is now
working as a social worker. In this context she had clear conscience of how
pragmatically narrowing placing herself first in choosing a career could be for
her: “I cannot go into business, it would not fit my spirituality”. She measured the
“sacrifices” involved, specifically from a salary perspective.
Value of work
Interviewees articulated work and identity in various ways. Interviewees G, H, O
and E identified the place of work in their identity relatively to the time used up
by working life. Interviewees A, K and L considered that work was giving them a
public image and therefore, in that sense, participated in their identity.
Interviewees B and J thought that the responsibility and commitment of implied
by their work constituted an important element of their identity. Interviewees M
and I considered that their work achievements would participate in building
their identity.
Interviewees K, G and H seemed to have doubts that this work identity would be
their true self. From their perspective, the work-‐self was more like a fabricated
self to ensure a living to the true self: “It also depends on what work I do. If I can
identify with the work I am doing then I will let the job define me. […] I sense
37
that my work identity and my personal identity may be separate” (Interviewee
K); “ There is more to life than just work and earning money. Finding yourself, be
yourself is more important” (Interviewee H).
Interviewees C and D reduced work to zero percent of their selves. Both
interviewees had experienced professional disappointments in the early part of
their full time career: to protect their emotions and well being, they consciously
wished to separate the permanent essence of their self and the accidental and
impermanent elements of work.
On the other hand, interviewees E, J, N and O needed to establish congruence
between their true selves and their daily productive activity: “If I have to spend
most of my day, I need to fit it with my character and spiritual life” (Interviewee
O), “I want to do something that is meaningful and represent what I believe in”
(Interviewee E), “I have a passion for what I do. This passion is me, and I am the
passion” (Interviewee N)
When queried about their attitudes towards hard work six interviewees (A, K, N,
H, M and C) conjured up a picture of working long hours, in a bureaucratic and
sometimes mindless setting. For some hard work would provide professional
and monetary rewards, providing a calibration in line with their hope to be seen
as performing and being valued and safeguarded by the organization
(Interviewees A, G, H).
However for the group that placed their personal goals and criteria first into
their work choices, working hard was primarily seen as achieving a goal,
overcoming a challenge, and an opportunity for growth that they would willingly
tackle: “It’s draining, but you have a resistance and you have to push yourself, it’s
kind of a sport. You don’t grow until you push yourself over that boundary of
comfort” (Interviewee J). Nonetheless, all interviewees from this group
associated hard work with a potential health threat, and highlighted the need for
balance. Their strong sense of self seemed to enable them to take a step back and
see a wider picture than their peers.
38
Committing (or not) to a job
To present an overview of the interviewees’ perspectives on choosing or quitting
a job, I categorized interviewees’ statements under specific themes that were
either related to their criteria for choosing a job or quitting a job. The numbers in
brackets refers to the frequency of the statements (Table 3).
Choosing a job Quitting a job -‐ Growth, development opportunity,
and challenge (13) -‐ Pay and compensation (10) -‐ Good corporate culture and
colleagues (7) -‐ Meaning of work, and extent of
contribution (5) -‐ Coherence with self (3) -‐ Enjoyment of work (2) -‐ Networking (1) -‐ Flexibility (1) -‐ Location (1)
-‐ Working like a machine, mundane work, and boring job (10)
-‐ Bad working culture -‐ conflicts with colleagues or boss (9)
-‐ Inability to see the contribution, no impact (5)
-‐ Rigid hierarchy, bureaucracy, and inefficiency of the organization (5)
-‐ Being micro-‐managed and having no control (4)
-‐ Lack of support (3) -‐ Competing commitments (family)
(2) -‐ Unfulfilled promises (2) -‐ Better opportunities/alternatives
(2) -‐ No personal growth (2) -‐ No coherence with self and skillset
(1) -‐ Working too hard (1) -‐ Instability of the organization (1) -‐ No respect (1)
Table 3 Criteria for choosing or quitting a job
Among the different factors, “growth, development opportunities and challenge
yielded the most statements. However, it’s interesting to point out that the end
the end goal of this development differed for interviewees: some emphasized on
building up a career, being valued by the organization (Interviewees A, C, G, H, K,
M); others anticipated the growth and challenge was fulfilling in itself (B, E, D, F,
J, L, N).
39
The topic of compensation came up a majority of time, but placed in second or
third position in interviewees’ list of criteria, and only once in first position. For
6 interviewees (C, E, F, H, G, L) their concern was at a practical level: Singapore
was an expensive city to live in – a valid point. Two interviewees, K and J, noted
that pay was an indication of their worth – their value to an organization, a
calibration element.
Corporate culture was another important factor, especially “the caliber of people
the organization attracts” (Interviewee J). In fact, it was doubly clear that the
general work environment was an important factor in the interviewees’
professional commitment: a “bad corporate culture” characterized by frequent
conflicts came up frequently as a factor for them to leave their jobs.
The relative low frequency of the criteria related to purpose and alignment with
self seemed to indicate that the interviewees could be more focused on the
conditions of work and benefits, rather than the mission and task given to them.
However this aspect was cited the most by interviewees as the reason for
quitting a job, specifically the idea of being stuck at a desk to perform boring and
mundane tasks. There is here a correspondence with their desire for
development and growth, as repetitive and boring work may not offer many
opportunities for self-‐development. Another criteria for quitting, “Inability to see
the contribution, no impact” appears in third position as a reason for quitting a
job. Articulating these two factors (mundane work and inability to see the
contribution), we can infer that there is a deeper questioning about their
personal added-‐value to the firm happening only when they are in the
organization, rather than at the moment of choosing an organization.
When cross-‐referencing criteria for choosing or quitting a job with the group of
interviewees who placed a strong emphasis on their self in their career decision
process, one could see that they made more statements related to meaning,
growth and development than pay, compared to their peers. At the same time, it
is important to point out that the interviewees in this group were not the only
40
ones who highlighted these factors as being important to their attitude towards
their jobs.
In order to determine whether the interviewees’ high valuation of meaningful
work and opportunity was a reflection of a sense of entitlement observed in their
western counterparts, I questioned them on their approach towards the learning
process as newcomers at an organization based on the following areas:
• What would be important for them to learn?
• How they would approach learning?
• What support are they expecting from the organization?
What would be important for them to learn?
Two interviewees sought primarily to understand the basics of the role, “What
happens between 9 to 7” (interviewee C), “what are the expectations”
(interviewee L). Interviewees D, J and M highlighted the necessity to understand
the overall picture of the organization, and how it works, specifically the work
culture and the underlying elements, as well as one’s position in it.
How would they approach learning?
On the how, three interviewees indicated the necessity to “be coachable”
(Interviewee D), to take the initiative to ask questions (Interviewee G), and to
accept criticism (Interviewee N). Interestingly, this type of answers
corresponded to a quest for meaning and growth in their job and a profound
dislike for repetitive work. Experimenting, practicing (Interviewees K, F),
“throwing yourself 100% into the task” (Interviewee J) was a second element
following the openness to learning, associated with letting go of the fear to fail in
new tasks and challenges (Interviewee F). Interviewee J reiterated the
importance of understanding the big picture as part of the learning process by
understanding first the overall scope of the task and then delving deeper into it:
“I take a big bite first and I slowly chew on it”.
41
What support would they expect from the organization?
Not surprisingly, all interviewees asserted that a collaborative and sharing
environment was a necessity, be it through colleagues, bosses, or mentors
available. The idea of their colleagues and manager investing significantly into
their development emerged. For example the boss could spend a significant
amount of time to touch base with their new joiner (Interviewee J) or
demonstrate his belief in the latter’s ability to succeed in the long run
(Interviewees E, I).
Interviewee G hoped that she would have the time and space to read and learn
on the technical aspects of her role. Interviewee A noted that the high
performers he had encountered in a professional services firm where he was
serving his internship were the ones spending time outside formal working
hours to build up their technical culture. These two comments may indicate that
they might not feel allowed to allocate time for learning on a typical workday.
Additionally, only interviewees A and L mentioned formal training courses
offered by an organization as a necessary support. This finding raised the
question of the perceived value of formal graduate training programs.
It appears that the most demanding interviewees in terms of work content and
meaning were also the humblest in approaching the task of learning their role
(specifically interviewees D, F, J, N). The more ambitious they were, the more
they were willing to learn the job. This finding may go against the sense of
entitlement observed in western counterparts. To be more precise, we may
interpret is as “I want bigger responsibilities, but I am willing to learn first”.
Being committed
Half of the interviewees, across all types of profiles, defined ‘professional
commitment’ as ‘working to the best of one’s abilities within the expectations
and contract terms initially set’. The ‘contractual’ approach to commitment was
further confirmed in their responses to the holiday scenario presented to them:
42
essentially, the interviewee had to choose between his/her personal relationship
and career prospects in making a decision. For all interviewees, responses
entailed a negotiation with their organization, to ascertain whether their
presence was absolutely needed, or whether they would be compensated for the
postponement of the holiday and the cost incurred. While thinking that such a
situation would be unlikely to arise in real life, 11 out of the 13 who were asked
the question prioritized work over the holiday if there were no alternative. Five
interviewees were concerned about loosing an opportunity to shine or damaging
their career (I, B, K, G and H), while five others placed the value of the task to
complete as more important than their time-‐off (D, J, O, N, L).
Additional responses on the meaning of commitment included: fulfilling your
responsibilities to the best of your abilities (H, M), doing more, learning more
and taking more initiatives (B, N, G), enhancing the environment and playing
collective (D), “trusting the organization and being trustable” (J), “sticking my
reputation into the job” (K), and preserving the best interest of the organization
(D, J, H). Interviewee J raised an interesting point regarding the ability to manage
the possibilities of alternative opportunities to his current role. He summed it up
as “no wavering”: “shutting down the voice of alternatives” to allow for a clear
focus on the task at hand.
When 12 of the interviewees had seen their parents remaining in the same
organization for years, only one interviewee saw professional commitment
specifically as a long tenure in an organization, and she perceived it in a negative
way. The idea of commitment did not specifically entail personal sacrifice, as
only one interviewee saw that as giving up family time for work (Interviewee N).
This may indicate that most of interviewees envisaged family/personal time as a
non-‐negotiable term of their lives.
In exploring the expectations that their organizations might have towards them,
the approach of professional execution of their tasks within the contract terms or
slightly more came most often, confirming a delimited and contractual approach
to commitment. The ability to blend in with the culture and motivate co-‐workers
43
was also quoted by 5 interviewees (B, C, L, H, M). Only a two interviewees
mentioned extreme attitudes such as “superior excellence” (E) or “behave like I
own the firm” (N), coherent with a quest for a meaningful and challenging job.
For them to possess the optimal level of professional commitment, the
interviewees identified four key conditions:
• An exciting and challenging job, with tangible results and enabling growth
and development (K, D, L, M, E, G);
• Feeling in a “humane” environment where they would be genuinely
treated as individuals, be it from the management, or the team around
them; and lastly (D, N, H)
• Obtaining some freedom and flexibility to pursue personal commitments
(D, O).
• Feeling that they have a stake in it (E, N)
As for the interviewees’ perceptions of the benefits of professional commitment,
interviewees identified: 1) the potential advancement and career development
(H, L, G, M, E, D); 2) building an internal reputation and being valued and
respected by the organization (H, K). Interviewee C was the only one to
appreciate the stability and security it could provide.
In the case of the disadvantages of professional commitment, the interviewees
had fewer ideas on this aspect, compared to their statements about benefits. The
issue that was mentioned the most was the loss of exposure to a variety of
experiences (L, K, E, D) or alternative thinking (M, E). Interviewee G saw this as a
potentially significant time investment impeding on her personal life.
From an organizational perspective, pros revolved around the return on
investment obtained through a stable, trained and “happy” workforce (E, K, M, G)
and the ability to cultivate staff from within. The disadvantages mentioned by
the interviewees were: the insularity of the teams, and the loss of creativity (C, E,
M, H). Two interviewees (G, I) acknowledged that it may require a constant effort
from the organization to keep its staff committed. Two interviewees saw no
44
disadvantage of professionally committed staff for organizations (D, L) . Lastly,
interviewee N, based on his experience of the investment banking environment,
identified that staff might be individually committed to succeed professionally
but not actually all striving in the direction of the organization.
Generational Perspective
When I first embarked on this research, I had formulated the hypothesis that the
older generation’s (specifically GenX) general disengagement toward work could
influence how GenYs viewed their professional commitment. However, in my
interviews I discerned that the interviewees possessed a restricted view of GenX.
Whether they had not been that much exposed or not the interviewees had not
observed salient behaviors indicating disengagement, or had not scanned them
specifically for this.
In fact, when they did notice the behaviors of GenX, they considered these
individuals such as their mentor or boss to be committed and a source of
inspiration (B, J, I, D, E, M, L, H). They were mostly seen as competent and
professional, while able to achieve a form of work-‐life balance.
Nonetheless, there were two interviewees (N,A) having completed an internship
in big service corporations who stated that their superiors were not proactive in
sharing information with them, limiting them to the task at hand. They also
noticed that some of their senior colleagues did not push themselves beyond
their workscope, or were merely motivated by money. In any case, the
information gathered on the perception of GenX did not indicate that GenY could
be negatively influenced by older generations in their approach to commitment.
On the other hand, when asked to reflect on the popular perception that GenYs
were volatile and job-‐hopping, interviewees mostly viewed this behavior as part
of a trend fueled by their ability to do so in an economy with a 2%
unemployment rate. It is “socially acceptable” to job-‐hop (I, B), and the job
market provides good conditions to explore different career paths: “we just want
45
to know more and discover new things” (B). Interviewee G viewed that as an
expectation that individuals have, enabling them to build up experience in a
varied setting. Interviewee K identified the “fluidity” of the economic climate, as
posed by corporations no longer guaranteeing a job for life, and reasoned that
individuals had adapted themselves to this climate by being more open to
changing jobs frequently.
However, there were interviewees with self-‐defined professional goals who
reacted strongly to the statement and judged their peers as being short-‐sighted
in seeking monetary benefits (O, N) or prestige by hopping from one firm to
another (E). As interviewee N puts it:
“I believe if you job hop, you are not learning as much as you can from the
job. […] It means that you are going to repeat your mistakes. It’s a vicious
cycle: If you job hop, you will job-‐hop more” (N)
IX – Discussion
The above findings paint a complex picture of professional commitment within
the adulthood transition life stage. The following discussion will summarize
findings according to the chosen research questions. It will then focus on the
group of participants that placed their selves first in their professional decision
making process. Lastly, it will outline implication for organizations.
Perception and value of professional commitment of GenYs in Singapore
For the majority of interviewees professional commitment was perceived as the
execution of tasks, using the best of their abilities, demonstrating
professionalism and exceeding set expectations. In that context, work is
allocated a delimited time and space within their overall life. This time and space
does not seem to be central, although interviewees agreed that quantitatively it
would use a significant amount of their time. This is also shown in a greater
focus on terms and conditions of their work, rather its contents, partial
46
allocation of work in their overall identity, and a negative outlook on working
hard.
Although the interviewees were aware of the advantages of professional
commitment in the form of career advancement and reputation within an
organization, they did not use to concept of long tenure to define it. This element
as a long lasting choice for a specific organization contrasted significantly with
their parent’s experience, almost all having stayed in the same work setting or
organization for most of their working life.
One factor that could explain the interviewee’s stance on professional
commitment is related to their current life stage. In this particular time of their
life there is a necessity to keep options open and experience various settings
before settling in. This is combined with the abundance of options and
alternatives available in Singapore (which is not the case in most developed
countries at the moment). Thus the interviewees may have found hard to limit
themselves to just one option only, and even harder to consider the idea of
staying several years in the same organization.
By juxtaposing the professional commitment of interviewees’ parents as having
“no choice at their time”, and the interviewees’ perception of job-‐hopping as
being “socially acceptable”, one could construe the reasoning of interviewees as
follows: “I will keep my options open, because I can”. At the same time, one
should also note that the interviewees did not view their parent’s long tenure in
their trade and organization in a negative light, for they recognized the stability
and comfort that it provided for the family as a whole. We may be then talking
about a generational effect, which is further bolstered by the economic health of
Singapore. The combination of these factors, including favorable socioeconomic
conditions, allows for a career exploration by experiencing several organizations,
which may not have been available to previous generations.
In this definition, professional commitment is also seen as contractual and
negotiable. This was evident in the ease with which interviewees pictured
47
themselves negotiating with their employer a compensation for their lost
holidays. This approach is coherent with Kissler’s definition of the “New
Contract” between an individual and an organization. However, when one
considers the high turnover rates in Singapore, one could question if this
negotiation actually happens once individuals are in the organization. If so, it
could allow for periodic readjustments of working conditions and therefore
renewal of commitment, and thus lower turnover. Interviewees expressed a
preference for a caring and open communication environment, and, for some, a
small team setting: these are favorable conditions for a continuous dialogue
between employers and employees. On the other hand, large organizations were
mostly seen as bureaucratic, rigid and lacking in openness, and therefore not
conducive to this open communication required for commitment.
Drivers of professional commitment
This research study main focus was to identify intrinsic drivers to professional
commitment of Singapore based GenYs. In the context of commitment within
delimited and negotiated conditions, our interviewees expressed their hope for
exciting tasks and challenges, which would help them to progress in their career.
Conditions for optimal commitment quoted by interviewees related to
excitement, human and caring relationships, freedom and flexibility. The findings
further indicate that rationales for the interviewees’ attachment to work relate
to affective commitment factors: choosing or quitting a job showed the
importance of reinforcing their competence (satisfactory personal development
and meaning of work); and comfort (satisfactory compensation and good
corporate culture). Findings also highlighted that interviewees did not feel a
specific parental pressure in their initial professional choices. This may indicate
that interviewees are processing their career choice using their autonomy
orientation (finding the fit with their needs), rather than responding to external
standards (control) or having a limited set of options to choose from. However,
other elements may indicate the persistence of extrinsic motivators in their
commitment building process.
48
The findings indicated a trend of some GenYs at calibrating themselves using
external indicators (A, C, E, G, H, K, M): salary, professional success and
responsibilities are quoted as elements indicating their worth in the eyes of the
organization. On the other hand this generation may also be sensitive to the
global trend of “work-‐life balance”, positively seeing their elders, GenX, blazing
the trail on that recent social norm.
Given the highly competitive school system our interviewees have just
experienced, the tendency to measure themselves against external standards is
not surprising. These interviewees had thus far successfully navigated the
system by graduating from a top university. In this bridging life stage, one of
their questions would necessarily be: “What’s the criteria of measurement now
that I don’t have grades?” Thus, it is only natural that pay, responsibilities and
reputation of the job may come first in mind. When some would understand
these expectations for exciting job but within a limited framework as a “sense of
entitlement” (ie “I deserve that”), one could interpret it differently: these criteria
are the ones enabling to evaluate professional satisfaction in the eyes of society,
so these may be the ones GenYs are seeking to achieve. Evaluating this approach
with Leci’s causality orientations, one could consider that a part of this attitude
may be control-‐oriented. Extreme professional commitment (intense
professional dedication, very long working hours) may actually be considered
similarly, but it hardly appeared in interviews.
Additionally, findings indicated a pattern in some interviewees (A, G, H, L, I) to
first evaluate available professional options and then fit in these options. These
interviewees considered this approach as pragmatic and accessible to them. In
this context, one could consider this attitude as somewhat impersonal.
A group of self-‐authoring GenYs ?
Contrasting with the approach of choosing among a limited set of options, D, E, F,
J and O focused first on their personal goals to evaluate their career choices.
Overall, in their approach to work and professional commitment, they provided a
deeper and more articulated outlook. This is shown in the table 4 below,
49
aggregating their responses, and comparing them with the rest of interviewees’
responses.
Mainstream Self-‐authoring
Choosing a career
Adapt to what is on offer
Finding a niche, pursue a passion, meaningful work Finding a job that fits my character
Work identity Two selves: true self and fabricated self at work.
Seeking congruence between the self and work activity.
Hard work Long hours, mundane work “It’s better to work smart”
Achieving a goal, overcoming obstacles, opportunity for personal growth. Potential health threat.
Criteria to choose a job
Opportunities for development Pay Organizational culture
Meaningfulness and having an impact; challenge; personal development; good people to work with.
Learning a job “What happens from 9 to 5” What are the expectations Superior’s and colleagues’ guidance, and willingness to mentor Ask questions Collaborative environment
Be coachable, and accept criticism Experimenting and practicing Mentorship Collaborative environment
Criteria to quit a job
Boring job, being stuck at a desk, mundane work Unpleasant environment Inability to create impact Presence of alternatives
Boring, being stuck at a desk, mundane work Inability to create impact Unpleasant environment
Meaning of commitment
Deliver on what is expected with focus and professionalism Do one’s best and deliver more Fit into the environment
(same +) “Behave like I am owning the firm” “Superior excellence” Unwavering in decision making
Conditions for commitment
Happiness, interest, and excitment in the job Seeing results Quality of human interaction
Having a stake in what the organization delivers. Having one’s feedback welcomed Compliance with one’s spiritual life
Job hopping A social trend It’s OK for me to do it Building a career is being exposed to a variety of environments
More opportunities available Peers are short sighted, with no long term goals, materialistic
Table 4 – Self-‐authoring group’s approach to professional commitment.
50
In the reasoning sequence of this group of interviewees, their individuality came
first: finding a niche, fitting the job with a specific character. When narrating
about their first steps into the working world, it seemed as though they were
choosing their job, rather than being chosen by a firm. Essentially they were
more concerned with what they would be doing, rather than the conditions of
work.
From their perspective, professional commitment encompassed the elements of
accountability and ownership: being committed is voluntary decision
accompanied by responsibilities. Their expectations of themselves and at their
environment seemed higher than those of other interviewees: every day
challenges, growth opportunities, seeking to gather as much information as
possible about the organization they are in. Moreover, they expressed a
willingness to invest more effort in learning and had the humility to be
coachable. Though they were clear and specific about their personal needs, they
had an enhanced awareness of the needs of a collective setting.
Given their ability to prime their decision making through their individual
interest first, we may consider that they developed a self-‐authoring mind, or
have may be reached it already. Is it possible to identify in this group autotelic
personalities? Some elements are indicative of this personality profile, especially
in the approach to learn, take on challenges and build their skillset step by step.
Beyond their approach to professional commitment, what distinguished this self-‐
authoring group of interviewees with the mainstream group of interviewees?
First, many of their responses suggested that they were less susceptible to social
and peer pressure, in evaluating their own worth:
“I always believed you should chase the dream, not the competition. If you
chase the competition you chase a purpose to satisfy somebody else”
(Interviewee F).
51
“I feel that if you just want to be in a big corporation, you are just chasing
mediocrity, just fulfilling what the world say is good or prestigious. I don’t
think it will stretch a person to their full potential” (Interviewee E)
Second, mentorship was cited as a prime source of self-‐reflection (“What do I
really want in life?”), by opening up horizons and providing new perspectives.
Finally, some of them brought up their spirituality as a major source of
inspiration: Christianity, Buddhism, or their own philosophy of life, derived from
hardships and experience. These interviewees positioned their own individuality
into a greater collective, seeking to be truly themselves while adding value to
their environment:
“I guess also my philosophy towards work is directed by my belief system, I
am a Christian, that all work should be done by some people, so there is an
element that working is part of a whole identity and be productive is
important” (Interviewee J)
When using the lens of their social background, it appears that these self-‐
authoring interviewees came from all classes, though a majority came from
upper middle class backgrounds. This finding suggests that an upbringing less
oriented on the need for survival and material comfort could allow the mind to
be more sensitive to deeper and broader perspectives. It could also be reinforced
by a generational dynamic: “My parents achieved a certain level of career and
material comfort, what’s next for me?”
This self-‐authoring group tended to confirm the higher professional commitment
gained through a focus on intrinsic motivational needs (self-‐determination,
competence and interpersonal relatedness). Leci and Ryan’s causality
orientations are primarily considered as stable personality traits. However
recent research has started to further test this foundation and uncovered that
the autonomy orientation may be more malleable than once thought (Olesen,
Thomsen, Schniebel, Tonnsvang, 2010). In the case of GenYs, one could consider
52
that, given the right information on how to approach the new social structure
that they are entering in this life building stage, and specifically the world of
work as described in the introduction, this could be a favorable moment for
personality traits to grow towards a greater autonomy orientation. The
importance of mentors in the life stories of our self-‐authoring interviewees
indicated their positive effect in this personality building and professional
commitment. The mainstream group of interviewees had actually high
expectations towards mentorship, indicating an existing awareness of their
potential role in this specific stage of life. It is interesting to note that in parallel
parents seem to have less influence on their decisions: mentors may actually be
replacing them, as the referent figures of this new world these GenYs are
entering.
Lastly, this group of interviewees confirmed that professional commitment is a
mindset. There is here a contrast with the contractual approach of commitment,
which appeared as transient and behavioral, when personality traits and
mindset can be considered as permanent elements of an individual.
Implications for organizations
The findings of this research study could be helpful for organizations working
with interns and recruiting at graduate level. First, they should to ensure that
entry-‐level jobs for university graduates are not repetitive, isolated and menial
in nature. Although the interviewees did not expect to become CEOs in three
years, or have fun every day, they did not want to be considered as robots or
simple clogs in a machinery. In a sense, these interviewees’ references about
entry-‐level jobs contained their fears of being easily replaced, anticipating the
evolution of Singapore, losing transactional and operations jobs to lower cost
locations. While entry-‐level jobs would normally be simpler and transactional,
one could include in their scope specific projects and responsibilities, enabling
GenYs to test themselves at more sophisticated tasks.
53
A classic organizational response to the need for experimentation of GenYs is to
set up rotation programs. Unfortunately, such programs might not be always
available as they are complex to set up. Moreover, rotations alone may not be
enough, if the guidance and personal growth opportunities are not provided to
graduates. Line managers, but also senior team members, play a critical role,
especially in mentoring new GenY employees. They can specifically provide the
big picture, and help the latter to understand their position in the value chain.
Moreover they should allow their GenY employees to communicate their wishes
and achieve the flexibility enabling a balanced lifestyle. HR practitioners and
managers at higher levels should be also involved in listening to their views. In
an Asian context, where employees are less vocal than in the Western world,
organizations may re-‐assess how GenYs views are being heard.
Moreover the contents of these discussions may be more effective if managers
focus on GenYs employees as a person, allowing them to identify in their current
job what intrinsically motivates them in their current job, what challenges they
want to take on and what they would personally benefit from these challenges.
The beauty of such a mentoring approach is that this deep level of guidance is
likely to be positively welcomed. As we have seen in our self-‐authored group of
interviewees, this approach could potentially yield better results in terms of
effort, accountability and commitment. Though this level of mentoring would
entail more time and greater emotional investment, this personalized and
intimate concept of guiding an individual at engaging oneself in the workplace
through self-‐determination could enable a longer lasting professional
commitment of this segment of employees.
Lastly, recruiters may consider focusing the screening GenY applicants through
their deeper outlook on life and a specific approach of their personal goals.
Individuals selected for a deeper awareness of their personal needs and
consequently a stronger sense of commitment may however be more demanding
in terms of responsibilities and autonomy in their roles.
54
X – Limitations
This research study had the following limitations:
1. Most of the interviewees were still attending university and therefore
their experience of work had been limited to internships. Consequently
we could extend the investigation to an additional sample of 5 graduates
with at least 1 year of full-‐time work experience and observe potential
differences in their approach to commitment.
2. Apart from the smallness of the size of the sample group, the fact that
interviewees were enthusiastic about the topic itself, means that the
findings could not be considered to be wholly representative of those of
their peers. Nonetheless, the enthusiasm and interest of these
interviewees in asserting their perspectives offered invaluable insights
into the thought processes of GenY Singaporean regarding professional
commitment.
XI -‐ Future Research
It might be interesting to further explore qualitatively GenX and Baby Boomers
on their current expectations and optimal conditions for commitment. This
might produce a similar contractual approach to commitment, moderated by
factors related to these specific life-‐stages. Indeed a recent quantitative cross-‐
sectional study has indicated minimal variations between generations (Wang,
Gardiner, Lang, Coulon, 2008). The overall mindset towards commitment at
work may be more related to a global cultural change rather than a specific
generational trend.
To complement this understanding of GenY’s approach to commitment, it may be
interesting to explore how line managers actually perceive GenY’s professional
commitment.
55
Lastly, we could investigate further with the GenY group how their causality
orientation might evolve from 16 to 25 years old, as they are navigating this
structuring life stage. If the autonomy orientation is potentially growing and
evolving, then we might investigate how seniors are coaching junior generations
for a self-‐determined approach to life and work.
XII – Conclusion
This research study explored the perceptions and experiences of professional
commitment of GenY professionals in a Singaporean context, and focused on the
20-‐25 years old segment. Work and career is a central topic in their current life.
However, professional commitment is a concept experienced within (or slightly
beyond) the boundaries of set expectations, and considered as a contractual
agreement. The exploration inherent to this life stage is enabled by the economic
dynamism of Singapore, and a social acceptance of job-‐hopping. It is all the more
possible that no familial pressures are experienced, and GenY have the ability to
select by themselves their professional future. By focusing on comfort and
competence elements, GenYs understand the personal benefits that should be
gained from a satisfactory employment. However, this research study highlights
the greater importance of self in the decision sequence: individuals who had a
greater awareness of their needs and inner desires proved to be potentially more
committed to their organization. This finding tends to confirm the effectiveness
of a self-‐determined approach to professional commitment. Mentorship has been
identified as instrumental in achieving a certain level of self-‐determination.
The main surprise of this research study is the coherence with which our self-‐
authored GenY interviewees presented their thoughts and plans for the future.
The way they articulated their self and their added value within the wider group
demonstrated that personal interest could be coherent with a sense of
community, and that this sense of community may be feeding a stronger sense of
self. To an extreme, one could consider that the more an individual is committed
to himself/herself, the more he/she will be committed to the organization with
which he or she finds alignment.
56
XIII – References Alsop, R (2008) The Trophy Kids Grow Up: How the Millennial Generation Is
Shaking Up the Workplace, San Francisco: Jossey-‐Bass.
Argyris,C (1973) Personality and Organization theory revisited. Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol 18, #2 (June 1973), pp141-‐167
Arnold, HJ, and Feldman, DC; (1982). A multivariate analysis of the determinants
of job turn over, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 67, #3, pp 350-‐60.
Bardwick,J (2008) One foot out the door, New York: AMACOM
Bateman TS; Strasser S (1984). A confidential analysis of Organizational
Commitment, Academy of Management Journal vol 27, 1984, pp 95-‐112
Bliss, W (2013, August 2); Cost of Employee Turnover.
http://isquare.com/turnover.cfm#top
Brendan, N (1995) The Six Pillars of self-‐esteem, New York: Bantam, 1995
Csíkszentmihályi, M (1991) Flow. The psychology of optimal experience. New-‐
York: Harper Perennial
D’Iribarne,P (1979) La Logique de l’Honneur, Paris: Seuil
Deci, Edward L.; & Ryan, Richard M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation And Self-‐
Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deloitte (2010), Talent Edge 2020: Blueprints for the new normal
Deloitte (2012), Talent Edge 2020: Redrafting talent strategies for the uneven recovery
Hart, D; Thompson, J (2007); Untangling Employee Loyalty, A psychological
contract perspective, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol 17, No 2 (Apr 2007),
pp 297-‐323
Kau, AK, Jung, K, Tambyah, SK, T, SJ (2004) Understanding Singaporeans. Values,
Lifestyles, Aspirations and Consumption Behaviors. Singapore: World
Scientific Publishing Company.
Kegan, AR (1994); In Over our Heads; Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kegan,R; Laskow-‐Lahey, L (2009) Immunity to change; Cambridge: Harvard
Business Review Press
57
Khatri, N., Fern, C. T. and Budhwar, P. (2001), Explaining employee turnover in
an Asian context. Human Resource Management Journal, 11: 54–74
Kissler, G (1994) The New Employment contract, Human Resource Management
Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 335–352, Autumn (Fall) 1994
Kupperschmidt B.R (2000) Multigeneration employees: Strategies for effective
management, Health Care Manager, vol19 #1, pp 65-‐76
Levinson, D. J. (1986). A conception of adult development. American Psychologist,
41(1), 3-‐13.
McGregor, D; The human side of entreprise. New York:McGrow Hill, 1960
Mercer What works, 2011
Meyer JP, Allen NJ (1991) A three-‐component conceptualization of
organizational commitment; Human Resources Management review, Vol. 1,
Number 1, pp 61-‐89
Meyer JP, Allen NJ (1997) Commitment in the Workplace. Theory, Research and
Application, New York: Sage Publications.
Nisbett, R (2003) The Geography of Thought. How Asian and Westerners Think
Differently, New York: Free Press.
Olesen, M., Thomsen, D., Schnieber, A., & Tønnesvang, J. (2010). Distinguishing
general causality orientations from personality traits. Personality And
Individual Differences, 48(5), 538-‐543.
Ouchi, William G. (1981). Theory Z. New York: Avon Books
Reichheld, The loyalty effect , Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996
Roberts, B; Edmonds,G and Grijalva, E (2010), It Is Developmental Me, Not
Generation Me: Developmental Changes Are More Important Than
Generational Changes in Narcissism, Perspect Psychol Sci. 2010 January 1;
5(1): 97–102.
Roland Berger, Asia-‐Pacific Headquarter Study, European Chamber of Commerce
in China &, 2011 from
http://www.rolandberger.com/media/pdf/Roland_Berger_Asia_Pacific_H
eadquarters_20110411.pdf
Schlesinger, Leonard A.; James L. Heskett (1991-‐04-‐15). Breaking the Cycle of
Failure in Services. MIT Sloan Management Review 33 (3): 17–28.
58
Staw,B (1977) Psychological Foundation of Organizational Behaviors, Santa
Monica: Goodyear Publishing.
Sweetman, C (2001); Employee loyalty around the globe, MIT Sloan Management
Review, Winter 2001
Twenge, J (2010) A Review of the Empirical Evidence on Generational
Differences in Work Attitudes, Journal of Business Psychology 2010 25
p201-‐2010
Wong M, Gardiner, Lang W, Coulon L, (2008), Generational differences in
personality and motivation: Do they exist and what are the implications
for the workplace? Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 23 Iss: 8, pp.878
– 890
59
Appendix A – “Question storming” with Interns and graduates 21st February 2013 Questionstorming with Credit Suisse Analysts and Interns . In this focus group, participants were only allowed to lay out questions related to professional commitment. They were provided with the definition of “the act of binding oneself emotionally and/or intellectually to one’s role and organization. The objectives were as follows :
-‐ Make perspectives emerge from the point of view of the studied population
-‐ Collect questions understandable by my target audience for subsequent interviews
Members of the questionstorming group :
-‐ 3 interns, 6 full time analysts -‐ 2 females, 7 males -‐ 3 Singaporean, 6 foreign -‐
The outcomes are ordered by themes, as follows : • 1 -‐ Value (of work) • 2 – Experience (of work) • 3 -‐ Choice (the moment of 3 -‐ Choice) • 4 -‐ Self (integrating the self in work) • 5 -‐ Loyalty (beyond commitment)
Question Theme What is “working hard”? 1 -‐ Value What do you think about “working hard” ? 1 -‐ Value Do you see yourself as adding value? 1 -‐ Value What’s your take on mediocrity? 1 -‐ Value Is your career your priority at this stage of your life? 1 -‐ Value What have you accomplished? 1 -‐ Value What is an accomplishment to you? 1 -‐ Value What is your take on efficiency ? 1 -‐ Value What do you look for in a company? 2 -‐ Experience What’s your view on flexible working? 2 -‐ Experience How do you think your manager can get the best out of you? 2 -‐ Experience How important is your work environment? 2 -‐ Experience What aspects of the Singaporean work culture do you find motivating, interesting ?
2 -‐ Experience
Do you see yourself as indispensable to the company? Why? 2 -‐ Experience Does attrition around you demotivates or shifts your loyalty? 2 -‐ Experience What is your idea of a team? 2 -‐ Experience Is the job you are doing now impactful? 2 -‐ Experience How does the loyalty/motivation of your colleagues motivate you?
2 -‐ Experience
60
Do you value change in your environment? 2 -‐ Experience What’s your take on professional image? 2 -‐ Experience How much shit can you take? 2 -‐ Experience What is “shit” ? a bad experience at work? 2 -‐ Experience Are you motivated by a role that requires extensive networking? 2 -‐ Experience Workload : intensity or variety ? what do you prefer ? 2 -‐ Experience How does peer competition impact you ? (positive or negative?) 2 -‐ Experience How important is diversity in the workplace? 2 -‐ Experience How much is it valued in your environment? 2 -‐ Experience Office politics? 2 -‐ Experience Where do you see your self in three years? 3 -‐ Choice Do you see yourself in the same company in 3 years ? Why (not) ? 3 -‐ Choice Would you consider working overseas? 3 -‐ Choice Why did you pick your current company? Your job? 3 -‐ Choice How does peer or family pressure impact your professional choices?
3 -‐ Choice
Is your family working in a similar field ? 3 -‐ Choice What’s your approach to risk? 3 -‐ Choice Do you prefer/want to run your own company or work for someone else?
3 -‐ Choice
How far can you stretch your patience before you look for a change in role/responsibilities?
3 -‐ Choice
How hard would you strive to change the system? 3 -‐ Choice Are you a rebel? 3 -‐ Choice Are you still on the job because it is confortable? 3 -‐ Choice How much do you value “give and take”, compromise/collaboration/sacrifice?
3 -‐ Choice
How sensitive are you to these ?(collaboration, compromise, sacrifice)
3 -‐ Choice
What’s your thought on “survival of the fittest” ? and relations within a team
3 -‐ Choice
Can you see yourself doing one thing all your life? 3 -‐ Choice Are you more people oriented or task oriented? 4 -‐ Self What drives your motivation? 4 -‐ Self Motivation factors => ranking 4 -‐ Self What sorts of projects / activities do you find most engaging? 4 -‐ Self Do you find that receiving regular feedback makes you work harder?
4 -‐ Self
Have you ever considered working in another field? 4 -‐ Self Do you know what you want to do? 4 -‐ Self Why do you work? For what? 4 -‐ Self How do you align your personal goals and aspirations with the ones of the company?
4 -‐ Self
Is your motivation work motivated or responding to external drivers ?
4 -‐ Self
Does professional image counts? 4 -‐ Self How meaningful is your work to you? 4 -‐ Self Would you prefer a role that lets you think /allows you to think 4 -‐ Self
61
out of the box regularly? As a student, do you like to be involved in small projects or just one but stick it out? Why?
4 -‐ Self
Are you passionate about what you do? 4 -‐ Self How do you define passionate? 4 -‐ Self Is your passion in line with what you are doing? 4 -‐ Self What’s your take on worklife balance? 4 -‐ Self How results hungry are you? 4 -‐ Self How do you handle criticism? 4 -‐ Self How important is it that you get recognized? 4 -‐ Self What is your greatest professional fear? 4 -‐ Self What do you consider failure? 4 -‐ Self How do you cope with it? 4 -‐ Self Would you inhibit your natural character to tailor yourself to your professional environment ? How?
4 -‐ Self
How do you go about adapting ? 4 -‐ Self How far would you go to make yourself heard ? 4 -‐ Self What does loyalty mean to you? 5 -‐ Loyalty Do you have any attachment to the organization you are working for?
5 -‐ Loyalty
62
Appendix B – ESSEC Intercultural workshop outcomes At the intercultural workshop on the ESSEC Campus, the improvised scenes
provided me with spontaneous elements, outlining mainly the deterrents to
commit into a job. Day to day discomfort elements, both in their working life and
private life, were the first to be quoted: impossible and unclear jobs located far
away from their home base, with no managerial support and no commensurate
monetary compensation, were seen as the jobs from hell. Additionally, the
students tasked to portray the recruiters displayed arrogant behaviors,
demonstrating a total lack of interest in the candidate himself. These scenes may
give us an indication of the underlying anxiety of the participants in entering the
adult world, and the greatest of all for them : physical and emotional isolation.
Being on your own.
This playful introduction to the topic was later followed by a facilitated
discussion. On listing components of their work life that would make them stay
in a specific firm, participants listed the below elements in that order:
-‐ Working atmosphere
-‐ Be passionate about the product
-‐ Doing a job that is satisfying
-‐ Career advantages, perspectives, advancement: a tangible path to take.
-‐ Firms values and reputation
-‐ Welfare benefits
-‐ Location
-‐ Having no reasonable alternative
-‐ My work having an impact, see a positive change
-‐ The stability and growth of the company
-‐ Having a good boss, understanding and communicating
The participants did not quote compensation and personal learning
spontaneously. Earlier, when I had consulted with a group of undergraduates
and graduates employed by my firm, these two elements also did not appear.
When reminded by the facilitator of the ESSEC workshop about the absence of
63
salary aspects in their brainstorming, one participant, quite obnoxiously, said
“but that’s evident”. Is it?
On the learning, there might be already an indication that GenY in passing from
the student world to the working world may not realize that their professional
development is far from over. The early quotation of “what am I going to do”
place them also in the added value position that they hope to have.
The facilitator further probed the group to identify components that could be
compromised or not. The non-‐compromised were the firms value and reputation
(“do no evil”), “My work having and impact and seeing a positive change” and
“Having a good boss, understanding and accommodating”. On the other hand, the
company stability and growth was the most disposable element “because you
could always jump onto another ship”. Compromises could also be made on the
compensation, welfare benefits and location. In this facilitated discussion, one
could ponder the group effect: “what is socially acceptable to say ?”, “What is the
aspiration I should display to the group ?” – this confirmed the added value of
individual interviews, to allow individual thoughts on the topic.
From a cultural perspective, and specifically the distinction between western
and asian mindset in terms of collective or personal agency, Western
participants (Canadian, French, American, Latin-‐American) were prompter in
quoting individual added value in the work, ability to learn and overcome
challenges, and their relative comfortable approach at negotiating their work-‐life
balance. On the other hand, Indian, Chinese and Singaporean participants placed
their thoughts and opinions in an overall context: “Do you leave after or before
your boss? It’s important to show your face”; “If you talk about work-‐life balance,
it looks like you are complaining. They have set a precedent, and you need to
follow”, “If you have been chosen for a leadership development program, it
means you are being valued by your manager”. Clearly, students from emerging
economies looked more sensitive to the restriction in choices and ability to
negotiate their own terms. In between, our Singaporean participant emphasized
on the need for cultural comfort (reluctance to move abroad) and benefits,
64
acknowledging at the same the hard working culture and long hours in
Singapore.
Thus, far from being a scientifically solid data set, this workshop highlighted 4
interesting points:
-‐ The underlying anxiety at being “alone” in this world
-‐ The socially acceptable trends in being or not attached to your work, and
more personal topics to keep close to one’s chest (money, learning)
-‐ The focus on “doing” rather than “learning”
-‐ An existing cultural divide, between personal agency and collective approach,
may be related also to the various levels of economic development and
available opportunities
![Entrepreneurial Regions: Do Macro-psychological Cultural … · 2019-09-29 · earlyenterprising careerinterests orearlyentrepreneurial competencies in adolescence, [60]). Thisresearch](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/5f58f7a73bc36368ed6d395e/entrepreneurial-regions-do-macro-psychological-cultural-2019-09-29-earlyenterprising.jpg)
