Journal of Global Mobility

Career mobility in young professionals: How a protean career personality and

attitude shapes international mobility and entrepreneurial intentions
Martin Mabunda Baluku, Dorothee Löser, Kathleen Otto, Steffen Erik Schummer,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Martin Mabunda Baluku, Dorothee Löser, Kathleen Otto, Steffen Erik Schummer, (2018) "Career
mobility in young professionals: How a protean career personality and attitude shapes international
mobility and entrepreneurial intentions", Journal of Global Mobility, https://doi.org/10.1108/
JGM-10-2017-0041
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-10-2017-0041
Downloaded on: 15 March 2018, At: 16:36 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 99 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 28 times since 2018*

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:123756 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-8799.htm

Career mobility
Career mobility in young in young
professionals professionals

How a protean career personality and attitude

shapes international mobility and
entrepreneurial intentions Received 8 October 2017
Martin Mabunda Baluku Revised 12 December 2017
8 January 2018
Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, Accepted 8 January 2018
Philipps-Universitat Marburg Fachbereich Psychologie, Marbug, Germany and
Department of Educational, Social, and Organizational Psychology,
Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Dorothee Löser
Department of Human Resources, Deloitte Consulting GmbH, Berlin,
Germany, and
Kathleen Otto and Steffen Erik Schummer
Department of Work and Organizational Psychology,
Philipps-Universitat Marburg Fachbereich Psychologie, Marbug, Germany

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of protean-related traits and attitudes in the
development of international mobility (expatriation) and entrepreneurial intentions among early career
professionals. Career mobility is of increasing relevance to achieving career success in the era of protean and
boundaryless careers, and in the present day highly globalized labor market. International mobility
provides opportunities for work in organizations (corporate expatriation) as well as in entrepreneurship
(expat entrepreneurship).
Design/methodology/approach – This paper reports two studies examining the role of “protean career
personality,” conceptualized as consisting of personal initiative and flexibility on entrepreneurial and
expatriation intention, looking at career orientation attitude as the mediating mechanism. In study 1,
the impact of personal initiative and flexibility on the two career mobility paths is explored using a sample of
442 German undergraduate students. Study 2 replicates these relationships among a sample of 100 early
career professionals who graduated with a diploma in psychology.
Findings – Results indicate that for the sample of undergraduate students, flexibility and career orientation
were positively related to expatriation intention. However, the mediation path was non-significant. On the
other hand, personal initiative and career orientation were essential for entrepreneurial intentions, with a
significant mediation path. For the early career professionals in contrast, only flexibility turned out to be
resourceful for both expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions.
Practical implications – Suggestions for supporting early career professionals to develop
interest in working abroad or in entrepreneurship are provided. Particularly, the results indicate that
protean traits affect mobility intentions differently. To strengthen intentions for expatriation work,
attention should be paid enhancing the ability for staying flexible when it comes to career choices.
This applies to both undergraduate students and early career professionals. However, a strong career
orientation is also essential to the development of expatriation intention among current students.
On the other hand, enhancing proactivity could strengthen entrepreneurial intention among undergraduate
students.
Originality/value – This study applies protean-related traits and attitudes; and how they work together in
the development of mobility intentions among undergraduate students and early career professionals.
The study reveals differential roles of these traits and attitudes among these groups, with regard to
expatriation and entrepreneurship. This is important for career guidance.
Keywords Entrepreneurial intentions, Expatriation, Career orientation, Protean career, Flexibility, Journal of Global Mobility
Career mobility, International mobility, Personal initiative © Emerald Publishing Limited
2049-8799
Paper type Research paper DOI 10.1108/JGM-10-2017-0041
 JGM Introduction
Flexibility has been emphasized in recent research as an important attribute that fosters
career development and success (Arthur, 2014; Hamtiaux et al., 2013; Lent and Brown, 2013).
Sticking to one’s learned trade is no longer fashionable since career paths have become less
systematic (Arnold, 2001; Baruch, 2004). It is conceived that career paths have become
nonlinear and discontinuous, and with more forces coming into play in labor market and
career development, individuals are now required to take more control of their career
development (Sullivan, 1999; Sullivan and Baruch, 2009). The labor market today is
grossly affected by technological advancement and globalization (Lent and Brown, 2013).
These and other economic factors have made employment more precarious. Consequently,
those nearing graduation from school face the challenges of prolonged and uncertain
school-to-work transition periods. The newly graduated face a challenge of competition for
existing job openings. Moreover, they compete with highly trained and experienced
individuals since many employers still pay attention to human capital (Hatch and Dyer, 2004).
These factors limit employment opportunities available to new graduates; hence, a protean
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

approach could be useful such that individuals can engage in mobility behaviors to further
their career development. Career mobility is a feasible alternative in today’s globalized and
increasingly service-driven economy. This alternative presents two work opportunities;
expatriation and entrepreneurship. There is also possibility of combining both mobility
alternatives; that is expatriates who are engaged entrepreneurship (expatriate
entrepreneurship) (Vance et al., 2016).
The boundarylessness and protean nature of careers today demands that individuals
become more flexible and adaptive to best manage their career development (Briscoe and
Hall, 2006; Hall, 1996; Lent and Brown, 2013) to work even in unfamiliar environments.
Moreover, the dynamics of labor market characterized by job insecurity, increased demand
for services, high unemployment rates necessitate that individuals should be willing to
consider non-traditional employment such as self-employment. Both expatriation and
entrepreneurship not only provide opportunities for early career professionals to work
towards achieving autonomy and career progress (Frändberg, 2015), they are important for
long-term social and economic development through new business developments and
knowledge spillover effects (Vance et al., 2016). It is already well researched that
entrepreneurship is an important contributor to economic development (Fritsch and
Wyrwich, 2014; Williams et al., 2013). Similarly, expatriation makes valuable contribution to
hosting organizations and economies (Al Ariss and Crowley‐Henry, 2013; Dickmann and
Baruch, 2011).
Career mobility has been widely studied in terms of working abroad, which is propelled by
either immigration or self-initiated expatriation (Al Ariss and Crowley‐Henry, 2013). However,
expatriation from developed to developing countries; and between developed countries seems
to be on a downward trajectory (Selmer, 2017) despite globalization and other challenges in the
labor market. Other forms of career mobility involve movement to new positions or transition
to another occupation. An increasingly attractive form of geographical career mobility is
expat entrepreneurship (Basaiawmoit, 2013; Vance et al., 2016). The present study does not
examine this phenomenon; it is assumed that since young professionals are increasingly
willing to go abroad as business expatriates, expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions could
therefore be predicted by the same protean attributes. The career profiles based on value and
mobility dimensions of protean and boundaryless careers (Briscoe and Hall, 2006) suggest
that geographical mobility and transition into business can reinforce each other; and can
therefore have similar predictors.
The present study sought to examine the willingness of undergraduate students and
early career professionals to expatriate or start their own businesses. We describe a protean
career personality in terms of flexibility and personal initiative; which are essential for
 protean career behaviors given that individuals with protean career orientation prefer to Career mobility
direct their careers (Hall, 1996). We thus test for effect of this protean career personality on in young
expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions. Briscoe and Hall (2006) argue that a person’s professionals
career orientation is shaped by a career mindset. This suggests that career orientation might
be the mechanism through which protean traits affect mobility intentions and behaviors.
We therefore test whether the effects of protean traits on mobility intentions are mediated
by career orientation.

The protean career personality

The paper focuses on the association between protean traits (personal initiative and
flexibility) on mobility intentions (specifically expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions).
We argue that these two mobility behaviors are typically protean in nature. Specifically,
self-initiated expatriation reflect individual’s proactivity (Selmer et al., 2017) in managing
their careers; and expatriation is frequently being used by young professionals to enhance
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

career development (Dickmann, 2017). We, therefore, suggest that early career professionals
with high levels of personal initiative and flexibility; as well as career orientation are likely
to be more ready to engage in these mobility behaviors.
It has been suggested that twenty-first century careers will be “protean” (Briscoe and
Hall, 2006; Inkson, 2006), meaning that they will be driven by individuals, rather than by
organizations. Self-initiated expatriation and voluntary entry into entrepreneurship are
therefore expressions of protean career behaviors. Based on the person-fit perspective,
we hypothesize that individuals characterized by a protean personality and attitude are
more likely to consider expatriation or entrepreneurial career paths or both (expatriate
entrepreneurship). Findings of research from the field of person environment fit indicate that
career functioning is best when there is a good fit, and moreover is a determinant of stability in
the career path (Holland, 1996). From this perspective, individuals choose work environments
as a result of many different factors, including their attitudes, values, abilities, personality,
and job characteristics, as well as factors relating to organizational structure and culture
(Van Vianen, 2000). Selection of a career path based on congruence between these personal and
work-related factors enhance likelihoods of success and satisfaction (Holland, 1996, 1997).
Yet the selected environments further reinforce abilities and interests, hence facilitating
success and persistence in the chosen career path. This also applies to expatriates; previous
research suggests that a combination of individual and contextual factors affect success of
expatriates (Kubra et al., 2015).
Perceived congruence between person and work environment factors; and the expected
success that follows this fit; have been shown to affect career selection ( Johnson and
Birkeland, 2003; Spokane et al., 2000). This indicates a higher readiness for a given career
path. Hence, it can be expected that there are some people who are overall more ready to
think about a job abroad or in business than others based on their personal characteristics
and their perceived suitability to these career paths. Based on Holland’s theory of vocational
personalities (Holland, 1996, 1997), person environment fit application to career research has
emphasized the role of personality on career selection. From recent career literature
emphasizing self-management and adaptability as requirements for contemporary careers
(Arthur, 2014; Hamtiaux et al., 2013; Lent and Brown, 2013; Lent et al., 2016), we focus on two
personal characteristics (rather personal competences), namely personal initiative and
flexibility. We posit that these two traits describe what we label “protean personality,”
which are important for career paths in expatriate work or entrepreneurship. This is in line
with Briscoe and Hall (2006) definition highlighting that protean careers involve two
aspects; individual’s internal values and self-direction in one’s career management.
These aspects indicate that career direction and success are partly dependent on a person’s
values and adaptability in career-related matters including decisions, choices, and activities.
 JGM These two aspects emphasize the role of personal initiative and flexibility to career
management; and we therefore argue in the present study that they are predisposing factors
to readiness for mobility (to expatriate or become an entrepreneur) as indicated in our
hypothesized model (see Figure 1).

Personal initiative
Personal initiative is both theoretically and practically significant for career management,
including achieving success in the labor market and dealing with challenging career
situations (Frese and Fay, 2001; Frese et al., 1997). Its relevance to the protean career concept
is embodied in goal-directed behaviors such as proactivity and self-starting, persistence, and
long-term focus (Fay and Frese, 2001; Frese et al., 1996, 1997). The aspects of being proactive
and self-staring could especially be important for self-initiated expatriation; which involves
individuals seeking work abroad on their own initiative (Selmer et al., 2017). Accordingly,
initiating an expatriation process by oneself demonstrates a proactive approach, which is
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

the core facet of the personal initiative trait (Fay and Frese, 2001). Such expatriates engage
in activities including gathering information about relevant job opportunities abroad,
selecting a country, and undertaking the tedious process of convincing possible employers
and navigating the immigration process (Selmer et al., 2017), which are largely facilitated by
personal initiative. We therefore posit that undergraduate students as well as early career
professionals who possess high levels of the personal initiative trait are likely to report
higher intention to work abroad.
Concerning entrepreneurial intentions, personal initiative is closely linked to the concept
of entrepreneurship, since entrepreneurial activities require creative and active capabilities
(Frese et al., 1997; Solomon et al., 2013). This is in line with Holland’s description of
enterprising individuals and the nature of careers that they thrive in (Holland, 1997).
Consequently, it is expected that individuals with initiative competence would be attracted
to and succeed in entrepreneurship (Frese and Fay, 2001; Frese et al., 1997; Glaub et al., 2014;
Rooks et al., 2016). Moreover, a related personality construct, proactive personality, has been
found to predict entrepreneurial intention in several studies (e.g. Crant, 1996; Dell and
Amadu, 2015; Prabhu et al., 2012).
The innovative and creative requirements of entrepreneurship are likely pull factors for
individuals with high personal initiative trait to engage in entrepreneurial activities.
We therefore expect that personal initiative predicts intention to engage in business. If this
hypothesis is true, then low levels of initiative would be a fitting explanation of relatively
low levels of entrepreneurship that was previously observed in some parts of Germany.
Literature indicates that particularly in parts of East Germany, initiative was for some time
perceived as bad thing and often punished (Frese et al., 1997). Based on this literature,

Personal Entrepreneurial
initiative intentions

Career orientation

Figure 1. Expatriation
The hypothesized Flexibility
intentions
model
 we can expect personal initiative to predict both the readiness to engage in expatriate work Career mobility
and to go into entrepreneurship: in young
H1a. Personal initiative is positively related to expatriation intention. professionals
H1b. Personal initiative is positively related to entrepreneurial intention.

Flexibility
Hossiep and Paschen (1998) categorize flexibility as an important vocational trait
(see: Bochumer Inventory for work-based personality description, Business-focused
Inventory of Personality (BIP)). In the discourse of career development in the twenty-first
century, scholars have advocated for flexibility and adaptability for increased chances of
career success. Accordingly, malleability in decision making enables individuals to manage
career transitions and cope with changes in conditions (Hartung et al., 2008; Koen et al., 2012;
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Lent and Brown, 2013). Thus adaptability becomes an important predictor of career success
(Zacher, 2014), but also the readiness to try new career possibilities when required; for
example during school-to-work transitions (Koen et al., 2012) or re-employment after job loss
coping (Koen et al., 2010).
Regarding mobility, flexibility facilitates coping with tasks and conditions during
expatriation (Baruch et al., 2016; Briscoe and Hall, 2006; Tung, 1982). Flexibility enhances
openness to situations, including new cultures which do not only increase adaptation but
also willingness to work in new places (Froese et al., 2013). Literature also suggests that
flexibility can shape the direction of career (Briscoe and Hall, 2006), thus the potential to
influence an individual’s career path. In relation to expatriation, there is remarkable increase
in self-initiated expatriation (Baruch et al., 2016; Bozionelos, 2009; Doherty et al., 2013).
This indicates willingness to expatriate; hence suggesting that some individuals seem to be
more ready to work abroad.
Similarly, success in entrepreneurial roles requires high level of flexibility for effective
functioning in the highly dynamic business environment; facilitating learning from
experiences and adaptability in business decisions and actions (Haynie et al., 2010). Yet this
adaptability has been found to relate to entrepreneurial intentions in some populations
(Urban, 2012). From the person environment fit theories, particularly Holland’s typology of
career environments (Holland, 1997), flexible work trait fits with the requirements of
both entrepreneurial and expatriation roles, hence we expect that flexibility will predict both
intentions to expatriate and go engage entrepreneurial activity:
H2a. Flexibility work trait is positively related to expatriation intention.
H2b. Flexibility work trait is positively related to entrepreneurial intention.

Career attitudes as mediating link

People choose certain careers or transition from one career to another for different reasons,
which Schein (1996) labeled as career anchors. From the taxonomy of eight anchors
(Schein, 1996), it is observed that at least three, including autonomy, dedication, and pure
challenge are situated in the concept of values and attitudes (Rodrigues et al., 2013).
This illustrates the importance of attitudes in understanding career interests and choices.
Lent et al. (1994) also demonstrate the essentiality of attitudes in understanding career
interests and choices. They define attitudes in terms of likes, dislikes, and indifference;
hence, the career interests are a subject matter of attitudes, which eventually influence
choices. Expatriation and entrepreneurship studies have shown the impact of attitudes on
intention and on actual behavior (e.g. Douglas and Shepherd, 2002; Fayolle and Gailly, 2015;
 JGM Froese et al., 2013). In the present study, we focus on one such attitude that is important to
protean and boundaryless careers, namely career orientation.
Career orientation attitude is largely reflected in the expression of career ambition
(Otto et al., 2017) and denotes the resolute desire to attain one’s vocational goals
(Maier et al., 2009). This approach of understanding career orientation particularly
emphasizes the preference for intrinsic over extrinsic rewards from the career activities
(Simpson, 2005) in line with self-determination perspective (Deci and Ryan, 2000, 2008).
We presume that this desire might constrain or enhance the intention to expatriate or
become an entrepreneur, or both ( for those who want to become expat entrepreneurs).
Stumpf (2014) argues that individuals use mobility to advance their career success.
Towards this regard, we argue that expatriation, which involves professionals offering their
expertise to foreign organizations and governments (Al Ariss and Crowley‐Henry, 2013)
is an opportunity for career success. Recent trends in expatriation also reveal that early career
professionals are currently motivated for expatriate work mostly for purposes that are related
to career growth; that is, individuals will accept or reject international assignments in
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

relation to how it will impact on their career (Dickmann, 2017). Especially, they seem to be
driven by the need to strengthen their social capital through creating an international
professional network (Dickmann, 2017). We therefore posit that individuals with high career
orientation are likely to have positive attitudes towards working abroad; thus possess a
higher readiness for expatriate work.
Still based on the idea that career orientation is an expression of need for achievement in
career (Otto et al., 2017), we argue that individuals with high career orientation are likely to
have higher entrepreneurial intentions. Previous research has consistently found that
achievement motivation is one of the psychological attributes that motivate entrepreneurial
behavior (Hansemark, 2003; Johnson, 1990; Wu et al., 2007). In addition, Hall (1996) contends
that individuals’ career behaviors are increasingly driven by psychological rather than
economic benefits. Psychological outcomes of work such as satisfaction and well-being have
been reported to be high among the self-employed or entrepreneurs compared to their
counterparts in salaried employment (Benz and Frey, 2008; Binder and Coad, 2013). Moreover,
some professions such as medicine, psychology, engineering, information technology, and
many others do offer good entrepreneurship opportunities that are professionally related in
form of innovations, consulting, and freelancing. Based on this literature, we hypothesize that:
H3a. Career orientation is positively related to expatriation intention.
H3b. Career orientation is positively related to entrepreneurial intention.
The socio-cognitive approach highlights a triadic interaction of contextual, personal and
cognitive factors in influencing career behaviors (Lent et al., 2000; Lent et al., 1994).
On this foundation, they propose that cognitive processes mediate the impact of
personal and socialization factors on subsequent career behavior. Thus, we hypothesize
that career orientation attitude mediates the impact of personal initiative and flexibility
traits on expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions. Lent et al. (1994) illustrate the
mediational role of attitudes by defining career interests in terms of likes, dislikes and
indifference; which develop from interactions with the environment. Attitudes are
often treated as a mediator in expatriation and entrepreneurship studies (e.g. Froese
et al., 2013; Kautonen et al., 2011). Following this idea, we therefore expect that a protean
personality predisposes individuals to be high on career orientation, which in turn may
shape the development of career mobility intentions whether to expatriate or become
an entrepreneur:
H4a. Career orientation mediates the effect of personal initiative on expatriation intention.
H4b. Career orientation mediates the effect of personal initiative on entrepreneurial intention.
 H4c. Career orientation mediates the effect of flexibility work trait on expatriation intention. Career mobility
H4d. Career orientation mediates the effect of flexibility work trait on in young
entrepreneurial intention. professionals

Empirical studies
Two studies were conducted in Germany to test our hypotheses. In study 1, we selected a
sample of undergraduate students across a range of disciplines who at time of data
assessment were enrolled as full-time university students. For study 2, we used a sample of
early career professionals who successfully managed to enter the labor market. All of them
had graduated with a diploma in psychology.

Study 1: undergraduates during their training period

Sample and procedure
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Data from 442 German undergraduate students aged between 18 and 54 years (M ¼ 23.05;
SD ¼ 3.50) were gathered via an online survey. The sample consisted of 167 business
management students (47.9 percent male), 161 psychology students (14.3 percent male), and
114 students of engineering and natural science (77.2 percent male). With respect to prior
experiences, 128 students had been abroad for more than three months, and 94.6 percent had
changed their location at least once (M ¼ 2.19; SD ¼ 1.92). Only 3.6 percent had parental
duties to fulfill, and 38.2 percent were in a partnership or married.

Research instruments
For all items measured, a six-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly
agree) was used. The scales are described below.
Career mobility. Expatriation intentions were assessed using the four most valid items of
a scale to measure geographic mobility readiness by Dalbert and Otto (2004). Note the
original scale was modified in a way that all items were now related to the context of foreign
countries (α ¼ 0.86; e.g. “I can easily image myself working for a limited time abroad.”).
To assess entrepreneurial intentions we selected the four most valid items from a scale to
measure entrepreneurial mobility readiness by Glaser and Dalbert (2004; α ¼ 0.90; e.g.
“To set up a business of my own is part of my professional goals”).
Protean career mindset. We identified two personality concepts relevant for protean
career development, namely adaptability (Hall, 2002) and self-directedness (Briscoe and
Hall, 2006) and assessed these using work-based flexibility and personal initiative. Personal
initiative was assessed with 7 items (Frese et al., 1997; α ¼ 0.78; e.g. “Whenever there is a
chance to get actively involved, I take it.”). Flexibility was gathered with the 14 items of the
flexibility subscale of theBIP (Hossiep and Paschen, 1998; α ¼ 0.83; e.g. “I perceive it as a
challenge when I am confronted with unforeseeable situations”).
Career attitudes. Career orientation was measured using a scale from the German General
Social Survey (Koch et al., 1994) which comprised 4 items (α ¼ 0.75; e.g. “To be successful in
my profession is very important to me”).

Analytic strategy and pre-analysis

Latent-variable structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS (Arbuckle, 2012) was
used for testing the hypotheses separately for the two samples. Baron and Kenny (1986)
argue that SEM is an adequate method to analyze mediation paths. To test H1a-b and
H2a-b, we built a model with no mediation through career orientation (M0). Furthermore,
we adapted a two-step procedure introduced by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) to test
our proposed mediation model with the mediator career orientation (see Figure 1).
 JGM First, we tested if the measurement model was fundamentaly misspecified by employing a
pseudo χ² test. In particular, we related the χ² value of the confirmatory measurement
model, also known as saturated structural model (M1a) that included all latent constructs
(i.e. personal initiative and flexibility as independent variables, and entrepreneurial
intentions and expatriate intentions as dependent variables). The model also included
the observed constructs (i.e. career orientation, age, and gender) and all possible
parameters relating those constructs to the dfs of a null structural model (M1b) that
included the same constructs but without any parameters relating those constructs.
We recognized that χ²/df values ⩽ 3 indicate that a structural model nested in M0 exists
with an acceptable goodness of fit. The observed variables were included in the
measurement model to ensure that the subsequent structural equation models were nested
to this measurement model. Sex and age were introduced as controls since former research
show that individual characteristics impact on mobility intentions (Tekleselassie and
Villarreal, 2011). We randomly assigned the items to two parcels for each latent
constructs in order to avoid the pitfalls of assessing the latent constructs with multiple
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

items (Little et al., 2002).

Second, we continued the two-step approach by testing if a less or a more constrained
alternative model fitted the data better than our proposed model (M2a) with sequential
χ² difference tests and the decision-tree framework proposed by Anderson and
Gerbing (1988). In particular, since our proposed model constrained only one parameter
more than the saturated structural model (M1a), the saturated structural model was the
only possible less constrained model. As the more constrained model we used a mediation
model similar to our proposed model, but without a direct effect of personal initiative on
expatriate intentions (M2b).
Furthermore, we estimated the adequacy of the measurement and structural models by
examining the χ² in relation to its degrees of freedom ( χ²/df ), the root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA), the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), the
comparative-fit-index (CFI), and the Tucker-Lewis-Index (TLI). We recognized χ²/df values
⩽3 (Kline, 2004), RMSEA values ⩽0.07 (Steiger, 2007), SRMR values ⩽0.09, CFI values ⩾0.95
(Hu and Bentler, 1999) and TLI values ⩾0.90 (Bentler and Bonett, 1980) as indicative for an
adequate fit.
Possible mediation effects were examined using bias-corrected bootstrapped confidence
intervals for the indirect effects, since it has several advantages over Baron and
Kenny’s (1986) method of mediation analysis and the Sobel’s test of indirect effects
(Hayes, 2013). Specifically, we considered indirect effects with bootstrapped 95 percent
confidence intervals containing zero non-significant and indirect effects with bootstrapped
95 percent confidence intervals not containing zero significant.
To deal with potential risks of common method variance (CMV ), we followed
suggestions made by (Podsakoff et al., 2003) and applied Harman’s single-factor test,
which entails modeling all of the manifested items as indicators of a single factor that
represents method effects. Williams, Cote, and Buckley (1989) demonstrated that about
one quarter of the variance in the measures examined in past literature on self-reported
perceptions at work was attributable to method effects; which indeed in the fields of
psychology or sociology tends to be even higher at 28.9 percent (Cote and Buckley, 1987).
Harman’s single-factor test revealed a poor fit to the data for the sample of undergraduate
students ( χ2 ¼ 3821.64, df ¼ 495, TLI ¼ 0.29, CFI ¼ 0.37, RMSEA ¼ 0.12), as well as for the
sample of early career professionals (described later in study 2) ( χ2 ¼ 1350.03, df ¼ 377,
TLI ¼ 0.28, CFI ¼ 0.37, RMSEA ¼ 0.16). In addition, the Harman’s single-factor test
indicated that CMV is not substantial in our data. Hence we did not consider the common
method factor (CMF) in our analysis since it tends to affect identification of the models
(Podsakoff et al., 2003).
 Results Career mobility
Means, standard deviations, and inter-correlations for all measures are presented in Table I. in young
The model without mediation (M0) yielded acceptable model fit (except in the χ²/df professionals
values; see Table II) and revealed that in line with H1a personal initiative had a positive
effect on entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ 0.27; p o0.001). However, in relation to H1b,
personal initiative had no effect on expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.07; p ¼ 0.35). Concerning
flexibility, we found a positive effect on expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.31; p o0.001)
confirming H2b but not on entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ 0.04; p ¼ 0.60) whereby
disconfirming H2a.

Two-step model testing

The pseudo χ2 test ( χ²/df ¼ 1.68) revealed that a sub-model nested in the confirmatory
measurement model (M1a) with an acceptable goodness of fit existed. Thus, our measurement
model did not suffer from fundamental misspecifications. Moreover, M1a yielded acceptable
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

values for RMSEA, CFI, and TLI. (see Table II).

In the sequential χ2 difference test we first compared the saturated structural model (M1a)
with our proposed model (M2a). This χ2 difference test revealed that our proposed model
(M2a) fitted not significantly worse than the saturated structural model (M1a), w2Diff ¼ 0.68,
dfDiff ¼ 1, n.s. However, the more constrained model without mediation of the effects of
flexibility (M2b) fitted not significantly worse than our proposed model (M2a), w2Diff ¼ 0.01,
dfDiff ¼ 1, n.s., and the saturated structural model (M1a), w2Diff ¼ 0.69, dfDiff ¼ 2, n.s. Hence, all
models were equally fitting the data. Thus, according to the suggestion of Anderson and
Gerbing (1988) we accepted M2b since it was the most constrained model. Moreover, M2b
yielded acceptable values for RMSEA, CFI, and TLI (see Table II).
The accepted model (M2b) revealed that in line with H3a and H3b, career orientation was
significantly related to entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ 0.27, p o0.001) and expatriate
intentions ( β ¼ 0.10, p o0.05). With respect to H4a-d, we argued that career orientation
mediates the relationships between personal initiative and expatriation intention (H4a) as

M SD α (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

Personal initiative 4.41 0.64 0.77 (A) 1

Table I.
Flexibility 3.64 0.66 0.84 (B) 0.43*** 1
Descriptive findings
Career orientation 4.20 0.83 0.73 (C) 0.37*** 0.15*** 1 and correlation
Entrepreneurial intentions 3.82 1.31 0.91 (D) 0.23*** 0.18*** 0.34*** 1 of the sample of
Expatriate intentions 4.50 1.16 0.85 (E) 0.19*** 0.31*** 0.14*** 0.14*** 1 undergraduate
Notes: N ¼ 442. ***po0.01 (two-tailed) students (study 1)

χ2 df χ2/df RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI

Model without mediation (M0) 74.93 23 3.26 0.07 0.04 0.97 0.94
Step 1
Confirmatory measurement model (M1a) 78.92 26 3.04 0.07 0.03 0.97 0.94
Null structural model (M1b) – 47 – – – – –
Table II.
Step 2 Fit indices for
Proposed model (M2a) 79.60 27 2.95 0.07 0.04 0.97 0.94 the sample of
Accepted model (M2b) 79.61 28 2.85 0.07 0.04 0.97 0.94 undergraduate
Note: Only the dfs of M1b are needed (for the pseudo χ2 test) student (study 1)
 JGM well as entrepreneurial intention (H4b). We further posited that the relationships between
flexibility and expatriate intentions (H4c) and entrepreneurial intentions (H4d) are mediated
by career orientation attitude. As illustrated in Figure 2, personal initiative was significantly
related to career orientation ( β ¼ 0.51, p o0.001). However, flexibility was not significantly
related to career orientation ( β ¼ −0.09, p ¼ 0.16). According to the bootstrap results, career
orientation only mediated the effects of personal initiative on entrepreneurial intentions
( β ¼ 0.14; Boot LLCI ¼ 0.21, Boot ULCI ¼ 0.58), confirming H4b. No significant indirect
effect of personal initiative on expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.05; Boot LLCI ¼ −0.01,
Boot ULCI ¼ 0.30), hence H4a is not supported. In addition, the indirect effects of flexibility on
entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ − 0.03; Boot LLCI ¼ −0.16, Boot ULCI ¼ 0.02) and expatriate
intentions ( β ¼ −0.01; Boot LLCI ¼ −0.09, Boot ULCI ¼ 0.01) via career orientation attitude
were not significant (see Figure 1). Thus, H4c and H4d are not confirmed.

Study 2: early career professionals after managing the labor market entry
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Sample and procedure

A sample of early career psychology professionals (graduates) in Germany was recruited
using again an online survey. Overall, 154 psychologists participated and answered the
online questionnaire (rate of return: one third of all contacted graduates). We excluded
self-employed and unemployed participants (54) from our analyses. The self-employed were
excluded because they already had already selected the entrepreneurial path; while the
unemployed were excluded because the study focused on analysis of mobility intentions of
early career professionals who had already succeeded at labor market entry. Of the
remaining 100 participants, 78 percent were female, 52 percent worked in the field of Clinical
Psychology, and 55 percent held a supervisory position.

Instruments and analytical strategy

We used the same measures for all assessed constructs as reported in study 1. All measures,
showed acceptable reliability coefficients (see Table III) as defined by Nunnally (1978) who
recommends Cronbach’s α of 0.70 as the cutoff. The same analytic procedure used in study 1
was also applied to study 2.

Results
Means, standard deviations, inter-correlations, and reliability for all measures are presented
in Table III.
The model without mediation (M0) yielded acceptable model fit (see Table IV ) and
revealed that personal initiative had no effect on expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.10; p ¼ 0.45)
nor on entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ 0.18; p ¼ 0.16). Hence, H1a and H1b that

PI – Parcel 1 0.87** 0.92** EnI – Parcel 1

Personal 0.16* Entrepreneurial
initiative intentions

PI – Parcel 2 0.65** 0.91** EnI – Parcel 2

0.51** 0.27**

0.54** Career orientation

ns 0.10*
Figure 2.
Standardized FL – Parcel 1 0.91** ns
0.80** ExI – Parcel 1
coefficients for the Expatriation
Flexibility
accepted model for the 0.33** intentions
sample of current 0.81** 0.91**
FL – Parcel 2 ExI – Parcel 2
university students
(study 1)
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01 (two-tailed)
 hypothesized positive relationships between personal initiative and expatriation Career mobility
intention, as well between personal initiative and entrepreneurial intention, were not in young
supported for the sample of early career professionals. However, we found significant effects professionals
of flexibility on expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.33; p o0.01), confirming H2a that hypothesized
a positive relationship between flexibility and expatriation intention. We also found a
positive relationship between flexibility and entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ 0.23; p o0.05),
confirming H2b.

Measurement model testing

The pseudo χ2test ( χ²/df ¼ 0.74) revealed that a sub-model nested in the confirmatory
measurement model (M1a) with an acceptable goodness of fit existed. Thus, our
measurement model did not suffer from fundamental misspecifications. Moreover, M0
yielded acceptable values for RMSEA, CFI, and TLI (see Table IV ).
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Structural model testing

In the sequential χ2 difference test, we first compared the saturated structural model (M1a)
with our proposed model (M2a). This χ2 difference test revealed that our proposed model
(M2a) fitted not significantly worse than the saturated structural model (M1a), w2Diff ¼ 0.73,
dfDiff ¼ 1, ns. However, also the more constrained model without mediation of the effects of
flexibility (M2b) fitted not significantly worse than our proposed model (M2a), w2Diff ¼ 0.20,
dfDiff ¼ 1, ns., and the saturated structural model (M1a), w2Diff ¼ 0.93, dfDiff ¼ 2, ns. Hence,
all models were equally fitting the data. Thus, according to the suggestion of Anderson and
Gerbing (1988) we accepted M2b since it was the most constrained model. Moreover, M3
yielded acceptable values for RMSEA, CFI, and TLI (see Table IV ).
The accepted model (M2b) revealed that, contrary to our hypotheses, career orientation
was not significantly related to expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.15, p ¼ 0.15) and entrepreneurial
intentions ( β ¼ 0.05, p ¼ 0.76). These results disconfirm H3a and H3b, respectively that
suggested positive relationships between career orientation attitude and intentions for

M SD α (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

Personal initiative 4.28 0.72 0.86 (A) 1

Flexibility 3.64 0.70 0.88 (B) 0.45*** 1
Table III.
Career orientation 4.09 0.88 0.83 (C) 0.65*** 0.25** 1 Descriptive findings
Entrepreneurial intentions 3.74 1.47 0.92 (D) 0.29*** 0.31*** 0.23** 1 and correlation for the
Expatriate intentions 4.19 1.38 0.85 (E) 0.24** 0.37*** 0.22** 0.08 1 sample of early career
Notes: N ¼ 100. **p o0.05; ***po0.01 (two-tailed) professionals (Study 2)

χ2 df χ2/df RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI

Model without mediation (M0) 32.20 23 1.40 0.06 0.03 0.98 0.96
Step 1
Confirmatory measurement model (M1a) 34.63 26 1.33 0.06 0.02 0.99 0.97
Null structural model (M1b) – 47 – – – – –
Step 2 Table IV.
Proposed model (M2a) 35.36 27 1.31 0.06 0.04 0.99 0.97 Fit indices for the
Accepted model (M2b) 35.56 28 1,27 0.05 0.04 0.99 0.97 sample early career
Note: Only the dfs of M1b are needed ( for the pseudo χ2 test) professionals (Study 2)
 JGM expatriation and entrepreneurship. With respect mediation effects (H4a-d), we posited that
career orientation mediates the relationships between the two protean career factors
(personal initiative and flexibility) and mobility intentions (expatriation and intentions).
As illustrated in Figure 3, personal initiative was significantly related to career orientation
( β ¼ 0.83, p o 0.001). However, flexibility was not significantly related to career
orientation ( β ¼ −0.14, p ¼ 0.13). According to the bootstrap results, there were no
significant indirect effect of personal initiative on expatriate intentions ( β ¼ 0.13, Boot LLCI
¼ −0.39, Boot ULCI ¼ 1.24). Hence H4a that suggested a mediation effect of career
orientation in the relationship between personal initiative and expatriate intentions is not
supported. The bias-corrected bootstrapped confidence intervals further revealed no
significant indirect effects of personal initiative on entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ 0.06,
Boot LLCI ¼ −0.86, Boot ULCI ¼ 0.96), disconfirming H4b. In addition, we hypothesized
mediation effects of career orientation attitude in the relationship between flexibility and
expatriation intention (H4c) as well as relationship between flexibility and entrepreneurial
intention (H4d). As shown in Figure 3, these hypotheses are also not supported, since we
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

found non-significant indirect effects of flexibility on expatriation intentions ( β ¼ −0.02,

Boot LLCI ¼ −0.61, Boot ULCI ¼ 0.04) and on entrepreneurial intentions ( β ¼ −0.01,
Boot LLCI ¼ −0.33, Boot ULCI ¼ 0.11).

Discussion
The current labor market highlights the importance of protean career mindset and
behaviors for especially young people today who are faced with unemployment challenge or
preparing for the task of school-to-work transition. Particularly, the need to be mobile has
been strongly advocated for. In the present studies, we examined the impact of protean
personality traits (as reflected in two personality attributes of personal initiative and
flexibility) and career orientation attitude on mobility intentions (specifically expatriation
and entrepreneurial intentions); and whether the impact of personal initiative and flexibility
on mobility intentions are mediated by career orientation attitude.

Flexibility and mobility intentions

The results of both studies indicated that flexibility had substantial positive effect on
expatriation intentions, yet almost similar effects sizes in both studies (study 1 with a
sample of undergraduate students and study 2 with a sample of early career professionals,
i.e. recent graduates of psychology). However, flexibility was related to entrepreneurial
intentions only among the sample of early career professionals, and not in the student
sample. This implies that for individuals who are already working, flexibility plays a role in
willingness to be mobile (both willingness to work abroad or to start one’s own business).

PI – Parcel 1 0.84*** 0.99*** EnI – Parcel 1

Personal ns Entrepreneurial
initiative intentions
0.85*** 0.91***
PI – Parcel 2 EnI – Parcel 2
0.83*** ns

0.55*** Career orientation

Figure 3. ns ns

Standardized FL – Parcel 1 1.00*** 0.22* 0.89*** ExI – Parcel 1

coefficients for the Expatriation
Flexibility
accepted model for the 0.32*** intentions
sample of recent 0.78*** 0.92***
FL – Parcel 2 ExI – Parcel 2
psychology graduates
(study 2)
Notes: *p < 0.10; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01 (two-tailed)
 Amongst the undergraduate students’ sample, flexibility only matters when considering Career mobility
expatriate work. However, flexibility is less important when it comes to entrepreneurial in young
intentions. It should be noted that during the course of training, students only have selected professionals
the course of study, but may not have firm thoughts or decisions about career path options.
Students with strong flexibility trait, yet focused on professional career success, may
therefore think of expatriation as a more viable career path than entrepreneurship.
This could also be because many undergraduate students could have had international
internship experiences which sensitizes them to expatriate work (Mather, 2008; Ryan et al., 2013;
Stumpf, 2014). Contrary to the socialization towards expatriation work, entrepreneurial
socialization through training of direct experience during university study seems to be limited
for only those students pursuing business related courses (Robinson and Haynes, 1991). Hence,
there is a possibility that the influence of flexibility on undergraduate students’ choice for
expatriation or entrepreneurship is affected by professional socialization.
For early career professionals, on the other hand, flexibility might enable them to have
open minds towards expatriate work and entrepreneurship. There are two possible
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

explanations for this relationship. First, flexibility in career decisions is related to openness
for new career experiences as well as managing career transitions (Froese et al., 2013;
Koen et al., 2012). Hence, for flexible graduates, who are either in the process of transiting
from school to work, or seeking new career experiences, both expatriation and
entrepreneurship are attractive career paths. Second, psychology is one of the professions
with massive potential for self-employment through private practice (e.g. we excluded
35.07 percent of psychology graduates in study 2 from the analysis because they were
already self-employed). Yet psychologists (particularly at high level of training) in private
practice tend to earn more than their counterparts (Finno et al., 2010). Hence, private
practice, just like expatriation, is an attractive career path for psychology graduates
with high level of flexibility. However, with an increase in the number of people engaged in
expatriate entrepreneurship, it would be interesting for recent graduates of psychology
but also other subjects to engage in private practice abroad, where the demand for
psychological services such as organizational consulting might be high in currently
industrializing countries.

Personal initiative and mobility intentions

Concerning the role of personal initiative, our results revealed that it is not related to
expatriation intentions across both samples (undergraduate students and early career
professionals). It therefore seems that personal initiative matters less regarding
willingness to work abroad. Although previous studies have indicated that personal
initiative plays a role in exhibiting proactive career behaviors (Frese and Fay, 2001;
Ito, 2003). We posit that expatriation belongs to the category of proactive career
behaviors, where people seek career development and success in unfamiliar geographical
location. This is especially true in the case self-initiated expatriation (Selmer et al., 2017).
It could therefore be of interest to scholars to further examine the relationship between
personal initiative and readiness for expatriate work in different populations or across
countries. It is possible that the negligible effects of personal initiative on expatriation
intentions in our studies are related to the limited sample scope. However, in relation to
entrepreneurial intentions, our hypothesis that proactivity plays a significant role
was supported among the sample of current students (study 1). Nonetheless, it was not
supported among recent psychology graduates (again, which could be an effect of
the sampling scope). The relationship could be somewhat different among early career
professionals for different fields of study, in line with prior expatriation (e.g. Mather, 2008;
Ryan et al., 2013; Stumpf, 2014) and entrepreneurial (e.g. Nabi et al., 2017; Starr and
Fondas, 1992) socialization literature.
 JGM The mediating role of career orientation
In this paper, we have conceptualized that protean personality traits are characterized by two
traits of personal initiative and flexibility. We hypothesized that a protean attitude, namely
career orientation, is likely to be the mechanism though which protean traits affect mobility
intentions (expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions). Results of study 1 revealed that career
orientation is related to both expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions of undergraduate
students. However, the same effects were not found in the sample of early career professionals.
In addition, career orientation was not affected by flexibility in both samples. On the contrary,
we found that personal initiative has positive significant relationships with career orientation
of both samples. The striving for professional excellence describes the core essence of career
orientation (Maier et al., 2009; Otto et al., 2017). In the era of protean and boundaryless careers,
being proactive and taking career initiatives are some of the ways that people achieve career
success (Seibert et al., 2001). Therefore, individuals with high level of career orientation are
likely to exhibit proactive behaviors that enhance career development; which may be reflected
in readiness to be mobile; that is either expatriating or going into entrepreneurship or both.
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Moreover, our mediation model hypothesized that the personal initiative and flexibility
affect expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions through career orientation. However,
indirect effects were only significant for the relationship between personal initiative
and entrepreneurial intention among the sample of undergraduate students (study 1).
Career-oriented individuals tend to value career success highly (Ellemers et al., 1998),
with high desire for achievement (Otto et al., 2017). Yet entrepreneurship offers both
opportunities for individuals to pursue their high career ambitions and exercise their
creativity and innovativeness. On the other hand, expatriation offers opportunities for
success for some individuals (Ramaswami et al., 2016), it does not necessary offer
opportunities to exercise one’s creativity. Hence, entrepreneurship is a desirable career
path for individuals, particularly students, with both high personal initiative and career
orientation. However, with increasing interest in entrepreneurial expatriation
(Basaiawmoit, 2013; Vance et al., 2016), it is now possible that expatriation work offers
opportunities for creative and achievement oriented individuals. We therefore encourage
that future mobility research to the role of proactivity and career orientation (or career
achievement motivation) in readiness for expatriate entrepreneurship.

Limitations and future research

Our studies have a number of limitations and potentials that should be considered.
Concerning the limitations, only self-report measures were used. Therefore, we cannot rule
out the effect of shared method bias that might magnify the observed relationships among
the variables. However, according to our analyses regarding common method effects this
problem does not seem to be severe in both studies. In addition, it has been suggested that
common methods challenge tend to be limited in studies using multiple item measures with
high reliability (Fuller et al., 2016).
Another challenge relates to the cross sectional nature of the studies. This restricts the
confirmation of the causality between the measures. Additionally, we studied a sample of
undergraduate students and early career professionals in the field of psychology (only) in
Germany. This limited sample scope poses a challenge to generalization of our findings to
students in, for example, less developed countries or early career professionals in other fields.
Intentions for expatriate work as well for entrepreneurship develop over time. This is related
to the socialization process that occurs during training at school or practical experiences
(Nabi et al., 2017; Porter and Umbach, 2006; Ryan et al., 2013, 2015; Starr and Fondas, 1992).
Therefore, longitudinal studies might be appropriate to studying the formation of expatriation
and entrepreneurial (and expatriate entrepreneurship) intentions. Future studies might benefit
from investigating robust cross-cultural samples at multiple time points.
 Despite these limitations, the present studies contribute to expatriation and Career mobility
entrepreneurial intention. The studies also contribute to the growing literature on in young
expatriation and entrepreneurship; individuals who are interested in entrepreneurship are professionals
likely to hold intentions to work abroad. Another contribution regards substantiating the
factors that impact the formation of mobility intentions and preferences at different levels of
career development. Particularly, we test our hypotheses with a sample of undergraduate
university students (training period) as well as a sample of early career professionals
(after professional entry or in school-to-work transition). We could observe several
similarities in the results with both samples, for example, the relationship between flexibility
and expatriation intention. This to some extent offsets the weakness of correlational data
and self-report measures.

Implications for practice

Results of our studies indicate that protean traits, flexibility and personal initiative, as well
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

as career orientation attitude play important roles in choosing mobility career paths.
Particularly, results of both studies show that flexibility is related to willingness to
expatriate among undergraduate students and early career professionals in the psychology
field; but also entrepreneurship intentions among early career professionals. Career
orientation was also found to be essential for both expatriation and entrepreneurial
intentions among sample of current students. However, career orientation could not mediate
these effects in both studies. In contrast to that, to possess personal initiative seems to be a
key factor in considering entrepreneurship for individuals still in professional training
(undergraduate students), but not early career professionals. Our results indicate that
personal initiative has the highest correlations with career orientation, as shown in the
models of both studies. Nonetheless, career orientation only mediated the personal
initiative-entrepreneurial intentions link in the student sample but not in the sample of early
career professionals. Early career professionals who already have jobs have already made a
decision regarding their career path. This limits the role of career orientation and other
factors. It is only those who are high in flexibility trait or those not satisfied in their current
work that may consider transiting into expatriate work or entrepreneurship. For students,
however, a strong career orientation could work as a guidance principle in exploring their
opportunities and making professional choices.
These findings have implications particularly for vocational counseling and career
guidance as well interventions seeking to promote career mobility among young people.
In general, for the students (those still in their education/training period), the specific
protean personality concept plays a role as it shows a differential pattern of relationships.
Whereas for entrepreneurial intentions, personal initiative is a central key; for expatriate
intentions flexibility is essential. For those already working in their chosen profession,
the role of personal initiative vanished and only flexibility could be regarded as a resource
when it comes to higher expatriate or entrepreneurial intentions. Hence, practitioners
could gear their efforts towards enhancing students’ potential for proactive career
behaviors and career orientation attitude to increase students’ likelihood of choosing
the entrepreneurial path. To increase students’ willingness to work abroad,
practitioners should particularly focus on flexibility. However, early career
professionals, increasing their potential for career flexibility likely shape both
intentions that to work abroad and to go into business. In a highly globalized working
world, with exacerbated unemployment and job insecurity, both mobility options
(expatriation and entrepreneurship) may provide practical opportunities for a fast
school-to-work transition and career development. Moreover, socializing and motivating
early career professionals towards both expatriation and entrepreneurship could be
essential for increasing expatriation opportunities.
 JGM Conclusion
Taken together, the studies presented in this paper demonstrate that protean-like traits and
attitudes are potential contributors to the understanding of career mobility preferences
and consequently mobility behaviors. We have demonstrated that personal initiative and
flexibility are essential traits in predicting intention to expatriate or to engage in
entrepreneurship; and that career orientation attitude is a mediating mechanism between
protean traits and readiness to be mobile. However, our findings have showed that the
relevance of these traits and career orientation to predicting mobility intentions varies
among populations. We found high entrepreneurial intentions among undergraduate
students with high personal initiative. On the other hand, we found high expatriation
intention among those high on flexibility trait. For the early career professionals, flexibility
predicted both expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions. Moreover, we found career
orientation relevant for both expatriation and entrepreneurial intentions among
undergraduate students but not among early career professionals. We hope that our
findings can stimulate increased inquiry on the role of protean traits and attitudes to
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

international mobility, including entrepreneurial expatriation.

References
Al Ariss, A. and Crowley‐Henry, M. (2013), “Self‐initiated expatriation and migration in the
management literature”, Career Development International, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 78-96.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Arbuckle, J.L. (2012), “IBM SPSS amos 21 user’s guide”, Amos Development Corporation,
New York, NY.
Arnold, J. (2001), “Careers and career management”, in Anderson, N., Ones, D.S., Sinangil, H.K. and
Chockalingam, V. (Eds), Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology – Volume 2:
Organizational Psychology, SAGE Publications Ltd, London, pp. 115-132.
Arthur, M.B. (2014), “The boundaryless career at 20: where do we stand, and where can we go?”, Career
Development International, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 627-640.
Baron, R. and Kenny, D. (1986), “The moderator – mediator variable distinction in social psychological
research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1173-1182.
Baruch, Y. (2004), “Transforming careers: from linear to multidirectional career paths. Organizational
and individual perspectives”, Career Development International, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 58-73.
Baruch, Y., Altman, Y. and Tung, R.L. (2016), “Career mobility in a global era: advances in managing
expatriation and repatriation”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 841-889.
Basaiawmoit, R.V.N.J. (2013), “Expatriate entrepreneurship in Denmark – can transnational &
cross-cultural practices be unilaterally adopted ?”, ISBE Conference 2013, Cardiff, pp. 1-17.
Bentler, P.M. and Bonett, D.G. (1980), “Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of
covariance structures.”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 88 No. 3, pp. 588-606.
Benz, M. and Frey, B.S. (2008), “Being independent is a great thing: subjective evaluations of
self-employment and hierarchy”, Economica, Vol. 75 No. 298, pp. 362-383.
Binder, M. and Coad, A. (2013), “Life satisfaction and self-employment: a matching approach”, Small
Business Economics, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 1009-1033.
Bozionelos, N. (2009), “Expatriation outside the boundaries of the multinational corporation: a study with
expatriate nurses in Saudi Arabia”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 111-134.
Briscoe, J.P. and Hall, D.T. (2006), “The interplay of boundaryless and protean careers: combinations
and implications”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 4-18.
 Cote, J.a. and Buckley, M.R. (1987), “Estimating Trait, method, and error variance: generalizing across Career mobility
70 construct validation studies”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 315-318. in young
Crant, J.M. (1996), “The proactive personality scale as a predictor of entrepreneurial intentions”, professionals
Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 1-11.
Dalbert, C. and Otto, K. (2004), “Allgemeine geografische Mobilitätsbereitschaft. Modifizierte Fassung”,
in Otto, K., Glaser, D. and Dalbert, C. (2004), Skalendokumentation “Geografische und berufliche
Mobilitätsbereitschaft” (Hallesche Berichte zur Pädagogischen Psychologie Nr. 8, S. 9-10),
Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Institut für Pädagogik, Halle (Saale).
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2000), “The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: human needs and the
self-determination of behavior”, Psychological Inquiry, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 227-268.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2008), “Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across
life’s domains”, Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 14-23.
Dell, E. and Amadu, I.M. (2015), “Proactive personality and entrepreneurial intention: employment
status and student level as moderators”, International Journal of Small Business and
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Entrepreneurship Research, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 1-13.

Dickmann, M. (2017), “The new normal of global mobility – flexibility, diversity & data mastery”,
HR Reviews, available at: https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1826/12581/The_
new_normal_of_global_mobility-2017.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed November 26, 2017).
Dickmann, M. and Baruch, Y. (2011), Global Careers, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY, available at:
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976107.n18 (accessed December 8, 2016).
Doherty, N., Richardson, J. and Thorn, K. (2013), “Self‐initiated expatriation: career experiences,
processes and outcomes”, Career Development International, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 6-11.
Douglas, E.J. and Shepherd, D.A. (2002), “Self-employment as a career choice: attitudes, entrepreneurial
intentions, and utility maximization”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 81-90.
Ellemers, N., de Gilder, D. and van den Heuvel, H. (1998), “Career-oriented versus team-oriented
commitment and behavior at work”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 5, pp. 717-730.
Fay, D. and Frese, M. (2001), “The concept of personal initiative: an overview of validity studies”,
Human Performance, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 97-124.
Fayolle, A. and Gailly, B. (2015), “The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial
attitudes and intention: hysteresis and persistence”, Journal of Small Business Management,
Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 75-93.
Finno, A.A., Michalski, D., Hart, B., Wicherski, M. and Kohout, J.L. (2010), “2009: Report of the APA
Salary Survey”, APA Center for Workforce Studies, available at: www.apa.org/workforce/
publications/09-salaries/ (accessed August 19, 2017).
Frändberg, L. (2015), “Acceleration or avoidance? The role of temporary moves abroad in the transition
to adulthood”, Population, Space and Place, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 553-567.
Frese, M. and Fay, D. (2001), “Personal initiative: an active performance concept for work in the
21st century”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, pp. 133-187, doi: 10.1016/S0191-3085
(01)23005-6.
Frese, M., Fay, D., Hilburger, T., Leng, K. and Tag, A. (1997), “The concept of personal initiative:
operationalization, reliability and validity in two German samples”, Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 2, pp. 139-161.
Frese, M., Kring, W., Soose, A. and Zempel, J. (1996), “Personal initiative at work: differences between
east and west Germany”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 37-63.
Fritsch, M. and Wyrwich, M. (2014), “The effect of regional entrepreneurship culture on economic
development – evidence for Germany”, Jena Economic Research Papers, Jena, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10273-011-1262-2 (accessed July 1, 2016).
Froese, F.J., Jommersbach, S. and Klautzsch, E. (2013), “Cosmopolitan career choices: a cross-cultural
study of job candidates’ expatriation willingness”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 24 No. 17, pp. 3247-3261.
 JGM Fuller, C.M., Simmering, M.J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y. and Babin, B.J. (2016), “Common methods variance
detection in business research”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 8, pp. 3192-3198.
Glaser, D. and Dalbert, C. (2004), “Bereitschaft zu beruflicher Selbständigkeit”, in Otto, K., Glaser, D. and
Dalbert, C. (2004), Skalendokumentation “Geografische und berufliche Mobilitätsbereitschaft”
(Hallesche Berichte zur Pädagogischen Psychologie Nr. 8, S. 18-19), Martin-Luther-Universität
Halle-Wittenberg, Institut für Pädagogik, Halle (Saale).
Glaub, M.E., Frese, M., Fischer, S. and Hoppe, M. (2014), “Increasing personal initiative in small
business managers or owners leads to entrepreneurial success: a theory-based controlled
randomized field intervention for evidence-based management”, Academy of Management
Learning and Education, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 354-379.
Hall, D.T. (1996), “Careers of the 21st century”, The Academy of Management Executive, Academy of
Management, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 8-16.
Hall, D.T. (2002), Careers In and Out of Organisations, Foundation, SAGE Publications, Inc.,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

Hamtiaux, A., Houssemand, C. and Vrignaud, P. (2013), “Individual and career adaptability: comparing
models and measures”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 83 No. 2, pp. 130-141.
Hansemark, O.C. (2003), “Need for achievement, locus of control and the prediction of business start-
ups: a longitudinal study”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 301-319.
Hartung, P.J., Porfeli, E.J. and Vondracek, F.W. (2008), “Career adaptability in childhood”, The Career
Development Quarterly, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 63-74.
Hatch, N.W. and Dyer, J.H. (2004), “Human capital and learning as a source of sustainable competitive
advantage”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 1155-1178.
Hayes, A. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis, Guilford,
Guilford Press, New York, NY, available at: https://doi.org/978-1-60918-230-4
Haynie, J.M., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E. and Earley, P.C. (2010), “A situated metacognitive model of
the entrepreneurial mindset”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 217-229.
Holland, J.J.L. (1996), “Exploring careers with a typology: what we have learned and some new
directions”, American Psychologist, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 397-406.
Holland, J.L. (1997), Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work
Environments, Vol. 3, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hossiep, R. and Paschen, M. (1998), Bochumer Inventar Zur Berufsbezogenen Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung
(BIP), Hogrefe, Göttingen.
Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance
structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Mutidisciplinary Journal,
Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55.
Inkson, K. (2006), “Protean and boundaryless careers as metaphors”, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 48-63.
Ito, J.K. (2003), “Career mobility and branding in the civil service: an empirical study”, Public Personnel
Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 1-21.
Johnson, B.R. (1990), “Toward a multidimensional model of entrepreneurship: the case of achievement
motivation and the entrepreneur”, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 39-54.
Johnson, S.M. and Birkeland, S.E. (2003), “Pursuing a ‘sense of success’: new teachers explain their
career decisions”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 581-617.
Kautonen, T., Tornikoski, E.T. and Kibler, E. (2011), “Entrepreneurial intentions in the third age: the
impact of perceived age norms”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 219-234.
Kline, R. (2004), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd ed., Guildford,
New York, NY.
 Koch, A., Gabler, S. and Braun, M. (1994), “Konzeption und Durchführung der’ Allgemeinen Career mobility
Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften (ALLBUS)”, available at: http://nbn-resolving. in young
de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-70202
professionals
Koen, J., Klehe, U.-C. and Van Vianen, A.E.M. (2012), “Training career adaptability to facilitate a
successful school-to-work transition”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 81 No. 3, pp. 395-408.
Koen, J., Klehe, U.C., Van Vianen, A.E.M., Zikic, J. and Nauta, A. (2010), “Job-search strategies and
reemployment quality. The impact of career adaptability”, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 126-139.
Kubra, S., Canhilal, R., Shemueli, G. and Dolan, S. (2015), “Antecedent factors for success in
international assignments: the case of expatriates in Peru”, Journal of Global Mobility: The Home
of Expatriate Management Research, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 1-31.
Lent, R., Brown, S. and Hackett, G. (2000), “Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: a social
cognitive analysis.”, Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 36-49.
Lent, R.W. and Brown, S.D. (2013), “Social cognitive model of career self-management: toward a
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

unifying view of adaptive career behavior across the life span”, Journal of Counseling
Psychology, Vol. 60 No. 4, pp. 557-568.
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D. and Hackett, G. (1994), “Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career
and academic interest, choice, and performance”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 45 No. 1,
pp. 79-122.
Lent, R.W., Ezeofor, I., Morrison, M.A., Penn, L.T. and Ireland, G.W. (2016), “Applying the social
cognitive model of career self-management to career exploration and decision-making”, Journal
of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 93, pp. 47-57, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.12.007
Little, T.D., Cunningham, W.A., Shahar, G. and Widaman, K.F. (2002), “To parcel or not to parcel:
exploring the question, weighing the merits”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary
Journal, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 233-255.
Maier, G.W., Wastian, M. and Rosenstiel, L. von (2009), “Der differenzielle einfluss der
berufsorientierungen auf berufserfolg und arbeitsmotivation”, Zeitschrift Für Arbeits- Und
Organisationspsychologie A&O, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 104-120.
Mather, P.C. (2008), “Interns at an international, humanitarian organization: career pathways and
meaning making”, Journal of College Student Development, Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 182-198.
Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N. and Walmsley, A. (2017), “The impact of entrepreneurship
education in higher education: a systematic review and research agenda”, Academy of
Management Learning & Education, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 277-299.
Nunnally, J.C.J. (1978), Psychometric Theory, Mc Graw-Hill, New York, NY.
Otto, K., Roe, R., Sobiraj, S., Baluku, M.M. and Garrido Vásquez, M.E. (2017), “The impact of career
ambition on psychologists’ extrinsic and intrinsic career success”, Career Development
International, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 23-36.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, The Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Porter, S.R. and Umbach, P.D. (2006), “College major choice: an analysis of person-environment fit”,
Research in Higher Education, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 429-449.
Prabhu, V.P., McGuire, S.J., Drost, E.a. and Kwong, K.K. (2012), “Proactive personality and
entrepreneurial intent: is entrepreneurial self-efficacy a mediator or moderator?”, International
Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 559-586.
Ramaswami, A., Carter, N.M. and Dreher, G.F. (2016), “Expatriation and career success: a human
capital perspective”, Human Relations, Vol. 69 No. 10, pp. 1959-1987.
Robinson, P. and Haynes, M. (1991), “Entrepreneurship education in America’s major universities”,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 41-52.
 JGM Rodrigues, R., Guest, D. and Budjanovcanin, A. (2013), “From anchors to orientations: Towards a
contemporary theory of career preferences”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 83 No. 2, pp. 142-152.
Rooks, G., Sserwanga, A. and Frese, M. (2016), “Unpacking the personal initiative-performance
relationship: a multi-group analysis of innovation by ugandan rural and urban entrepreneurs”,
Applied Psychology, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 99-131.
Ryan, J., Silvanto, S. and Brown, H.T. (2013), “The impact of experience-based MBA educational
programs on international career mobility”, Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate
Management Research, Vol. 1 No. 1959, pp. 28-45.
Ryan, J., Silvanto, S. and Ozkaya, H.E. (2015), “A contextual, theoretical and empirical analysis of the
uses of university degrees as symbolic capital in self-initiated expatriation”, European Journal of
International Management, Vol. 9 No. 5, p. 614.
Schein, E.H. (1996), “Career anchors revisited: implications for career development in the 21st century.”,
Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 80-88.
Seibert, S.E., Kraimer, M.L. and Crant, J.M. (2001), “What do proactive people do? A longitudinal model
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

linking proactive personality and career success”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 243, pp. 845-874.
Selmer, J. (2017), “Where have all the expatriates gone?”, Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of
Expatriate Management Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 2-4.
Selmer, J., Andresen, M. and Cerdin, J.-L. (2017), “Self-initiated expatriates”, in Mcnulty, Y. and Selmer, J.
(Eds), Research Handbook of Expatriates, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham,
pp. 187-201.
Simpson, R. (2005), “Men in non-traditional occupations: career entry, carrer orientation and experience
of role strain”, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 363-380.
Solomon, G., Frese, M., Friedrich, C. and Glaub, M. (2013), “Can personal initiative training improve
small business success? A longitudinal South African evaluation study”, The International
Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 255-268.
Spokane, A.R., Meir, E.I. and Catalano, M. (2000), “Person – environment congruence and Holland’s
theory: a review and reconsideration”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 137-187.
Starr, J. a. and Fondas, N. (1992), “A model of entrepreneurial socialization and organization formation”,
Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 67-77.
Steiger, J. (2007), “Understanding the limitations of global fit assesment in structural equation
modelling.”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 893-898.
Stumpf, S.A. (2014), “A longitudinal study of career success, embeddedness, and mobility of early
career professionals”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 180-190.
Sullivan, S.E. (1999), “The changing nature of careers: a review and research agenda”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 457-484.
Sullivan, S.E. and Baruch, Y. (2009), “Advances in career theory and research: a critical review and
agenda for future exploration”, Journal of Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1542-1571.
Tekleselassie, A.A. and Villarreal, P. (2011), “Career mobility and departure intentions among school
principals in the United States: incentives and disincentives”, Leadership and Policy in Schools,
Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 251-293.
Tung, R.L. (1982), “Selection and training procedures of U.S., European, and Japanese multinationals”,
California Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 57-71.
Urban, B. (2012), “A metacognitive approach to explaining entrepreneurial intentions”, Management
Dynamics, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 16-33.
Van Vianen, A.E.M. (2000), “Person-organization fit: the match between newcomers’ and recruiters’
preferences for organizational cultures”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 113-149.
Vance, C.M., McNulty, Y., Paik, Y. and D’Mello, J. (2016), “The expat-preneur: conceptualizing a
growing international career phenomenon”, Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate
Management Research, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 202-224.
 Williams, L.J., Cote, J. a. and Buckley, M.R. (1989), “Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and Career mobility
perceptions at work: reality or artifact?”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 462-468. in young
Williams, N., Vorley, T. and Ketikidis, P.H. (2013), “Economic resilience and entrepreneurship: a case
study of the Thessaloniki city region”, Local Economy, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 399-415.
professionals
Wu, S., Matthews and Dagher, G.K. (2007), “Need for achievement, business goals, and entrepreneurial
persistence”, Management Research News, Vol. 30 No. 12, pp. 928-941.
Zacher, H. (2014), “Career adaptability predicts subjective career success above and beyond personality
traits and core self-evaluations”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 21-30.

Corresponding author
Martin Mabunda Baluku can be contacted at: martin.baluku@staff.uni-marburg.de
Downloaded by Kent State University At 16:36 15 March 2018 (PT)

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com