Le Blanc Pascale M, Van der Heijden Beatrice I J M, Van Vuuren Tinka
Human Performance Management Group, Department of Industrial Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Faculty of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 27;8:1690. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01690. eCollection 2017.
Though the importance of sustainable employability throughout people's working life is undisputed, up till now only one attempt for a conceptual definition has been made (van der Klink et al., 2016). Following the suggestions to further refine and improve this definition recently put forward by Fleuren et al. (2016), we propose an approach to sustainable employability that is based on the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) framework, and incorporates three indicators: the ability, the motivation, and the opportunity to continue working, respectively. As sustainable employability is considered to be an important aspect of successful aging at work, this study used four different conceptualizations of aging at work to set up convergent and divergent validity of our operationalization of sustainable employability: calendar age, organizational age (job and organizational tenure), functional age (work ability), and life-span age (partner and children). We formulated several hypotheses that were tested by analyzing data from an online survey among 180 employees from Dutch public service organizations who filled out a questionnaire on different age concepts, and their ability, motivation, and opportunity to continue working. Multiple regression analyses were performed, and results showed that the four conceptualizations of aging were differently related to the three indicators of sustainable employability. Life-span age, in terms of having children, had the strongest negative relationship with the ability to continue working, organizational age (i.e., organizational tenure) had the strongest negative relationship with the motivation to continue working, and functional age had the strongest negative relationship with the opportunity to continue working. Moreover, functional age was significantly negatively related to the other two indicators of sustainable employability too, while life-span age appeared to enhance the ability and motivation to continue working (in terms of having children) and the perceived opportunity to continue working (in terms of having a partner). Calendar age was only important for the opportunity to continue working and appeared to have a negative association with this outcome variable. These results lend support to our proposed operationalization of sustainable employability by showing that the three indicators are differently related to different age conceptualizations thus expanding previous research on the conceptualization of sustainable employability.
尽管在人们的职业生涯中,可持续就业能力的重要性是无可争议的,但到目前为止,仅有一次尝试对其进行概念性定义(范德克林克等人,2016年)。遵循弗勒伦等人(2016年)最近提出的进一步完善和改进该定义的建议,我们提出了一种基于能力-动机-机会(AMO)框架的可持续就业能力方法,并纳入了三个指标:分别是继续工作的能力、动机和机会。由于可持续就业能力被认为是工作中成功老龄化的一个重要方面,本研究使用了四种不同的工作老龄化概念来建立我们对可持续就业能力操作化的收敛效度和区分效度:日历年龄、组织年龄(工作和组织任期)、功能年龄(工作能力)和寿命年龄(伴侣和子女)。我们提出了几个假设,并通过分析来自荷兰公共服务组织的180名员工的在线调查数据进行检验,这些员工填写了一份关于不同年龄概念以及他们继续工作的能力、动机和机会的问卷。进行了多元回归分析,结果表明,老龄化的四种概念与可持续就业能力的三个指标的关系各不相同。就生育子女而言,寿命年龄与继续工作的能力呈最强的负相关,组织年龄(即组织任期)与继续工作的动机呈最强的负相关,功能年龄与继续工作的机会呈最强的负相关。此外,功能年龄与可持续就业能力的其他两个指标也显著负相关,而寿命年龄似乎增强了继续工作的能力和动机(就生育子女而言)以及继续工作的感知机会(就有伴侣而言)。日历年龄仅对继续工作的机会重要,并且似乎与这个结果变量呈负相关。这些结果支持了我们提出的可持续就业能力操作化,表明这三个指标与不同的年龄概念有不同的关系,从而扩展了先前关于可持续就业能力概念化的研究。