Contextual and Individual Determinants of Sustainable Careers: A Serial Indirect Effect Model through Career Crafting and Person-Career Fit

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper proves that work-family needs and resources can positively affect career shaping, and career shaping can improve person-career fit, thereby improving career sustainability indicators, such as work-family balance, work engagement, employability and work stress. Integrating resource conservation theory and a sustainable career framework, the article proposes a new sequential indirect effects model that explores how work-family demands and resources affect career sustainability through career shaping and person-career fit. The overall structure of the article is reasonable, the data analysis is reasonable, the content is rich, and it has a strong research value. There are some problems: 1. The measurement index is relatively single; 2. The relationship between work-family needs and resources and career shaping and person-career fit has not been explored and proved; 3. The relationship mechanism between career shaping, person-career fit and career sustainability indicators has not been explored in depth, such as how career shaping improves person-career fit and thus improves work-family balance.

Author Response

We appreciate your review and are pleased to inform you that we have examined the points you raised in our manuscript. We have revisited the sections and ensured that our theoretical arguments regarding the relationship between work-family demands and resources and career crafting and person-career fit are presented clearly and provided robust evidence through our data analyses.

Additionally, we have reevaluated the relationship mechanism between career crafting, person-career fit, and career sustainability indicators, including how career crafting improves person-career fit and enhances work-family balance. We have examined both single and serial indirect effects between contextual demands/resources, career crafting, person-career fit, and career sustainability indicators. We have thoroughly discussed these findings and provided theoretical and practical implications accordingly.

In addition, we systematically designed the measurement procedures to ensure the validity and reliability of our constructs. Prior to data collection, we conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify relevant measurement scales and adapted them to fit the context of our study. We employed established scales to measure constructs such as work-family demands, resources, career crafting, person-career fit, and career sustainability indicators. To assess construct validity, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the factorial structure of our measurement model. The results of the CFA provided evidence supporting the convergent and discriminant validity of our constructs. Additionally, we assessed the reliability of our measures, which demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency for all constructs. By systematically designing our measurement procedures and reporting construct validity and reliability results, we ensured the robustness and credibility of our study findings. Hence, we revisited the manuscript and strengthened the rigor and relevance of our study, and we thank you for your feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

In my opinion, the present manuscript does have sufficient scientific merit as it demonstrates clarity, rigor and depth of research.

Nonetheless minor changes are required:

Ethical considerations are missing in this study, regarding the distribution of resources, power dynamics, and social justice. Without addressing these ethical dimensions, the integration of COR theory with sustainable careers may potentially reinforce existing inequalities and injustices within the workforce. This must be explained in the main text of the article.

Also, the study overlooks potential trade-offs between personal, professional, and societal goals with regard to sustainable careers. While integrating COR theory with sustainable careers it is not sufficiently clear these trade-offs and their implications for individuals and organizations. The study underlines na optimistic view of sustainable careers that overlooks the challenges and sacrifices individuals may face in their pursuit. This could be added as a further research avenue.

Author Response

We appreciate your thoughtful review and are grateful for your recognition of the scientific merit of our manuscript. In response to your valuable feedback, we have made revisions to address the minor changes required.

Regarding ethical considerations, we have included statements in the future research section of our paper acknowledging the importance of addressing power dynamics, resource distribution, and social justice in the context of sustainable careers. We agree that these ethical dimensions are crucial to consider, and future research should delve deeper into their implications for perpetuating or mitigating existing inequalities within the workforce.

Additionally, we have acknowledged the need to explore potential trade-offs between personal, professional, and societal goals in the pursuit of sustainable careers. We recognize the importance of understanding the challenges and sacrifices individuals may face in this pursuit and have highlighted this as a future research avenue. By further exploring these trade-offs, researchers can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities involved in fostering sustainable career development.

Please see the revisions below:

Page 18, Lines 714-719: "Moreover, while integrating COR theory with sustainable careers, it is important to consider the trade-offs between personal, professional, and societal goals in the pursuit of sustainable careers and their implications for individuals and organizations. Hence, future research could explore further the obstacles and compromises individuals encounter, offering a more detailed comprehension of the intricacies involved in fostering sustainable career development."

Page 18, Lines 730-734: "It is also important to acknowledge the role of ethical aspects related to power dynamics, resource allocation, and social justice in examining sustainable careers from the COR perspective. Future research could involve such ethical considerations to provide more comprehensive implications regarding the impact of the COR perspective on the perpetuation or mitigation of existing inequalities in career sustainability."

Once again, we sincerely appreciate your insightful comments, which have strengthened the depth and relevance of our study. Thank you for your valuable feedback.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Following a detailed review of the manuscript titled "Contextual and Individual Determinants of Sustainable Careers: A Serial Indirect Effect Model Through Career Crafting and Person-Career Fit," we commend you for the significant work addressing important determinants of sustainable careers. However, we have identified some areas that could be improved to strengthen the study's contribution further. Below, we present our suggestions for the Abstract and Method sections, as well as the Conclusion:

Abstract: We noticed a lack of a clear objective in the abstract. In this section, we recommend a concise statement of the study's main objective to provide readers with an immediate understanding of the research focus and its contributions.

Method:

1. Methodological Flow: Including a methodological flowchart would facilitate understanding of the research process. This would provide a quick and clear overview of the research approach, enhancing methodological transparency.
2. Model Fit Analysis: We noted the absence of a detailed discussion of the structural equation model's overall fit. We recommend reporting and discussing fit measures, such as CFI, NNFI, RMSEA, and SRMR to validate the proposed model further.

Conclusion: The current conclusion could be enhanced by:

1. Deep Reflection on Implications: This section expands the discussion on the findings' theoretical and practical implications, exploring what the results mean for the field of sustainable careers.
2. Scientific and Managerial Contributions: This section highlights the study's scientific contributions and managerial implications, demonstrating its relevance to academics and practitioners.

These modifications will significantly enrich the manuscript, providing greater clarity and depth to the research. We appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the enhancement of this study and look forward to seeing your valuable contributions to the field of sustainable careers.

Sincerely,

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript is well-written and demonstrates a good command of academic English overall. However, minor editing is recommended to ensure the paper's clarity and readability. Specifically, attention could be beneficial in the following areas:

1. Consistency in Terminology: To avoid confusion, use key terms related to sustainable careers consistently throughout the manuscript.

2. Sentence Structure: In some sections, sentences could be simplified or shortened to enhance understanding without sacrificing the information's complexity.

3. Grammar and Punctuation: While minimal grammatical errors, thorough proofreading could correct occasional punctuation mistakes and improve sentence flow.

4. Clarification of Complex Ideas: Certain sections that introduce complex theoretical concepts or detailed findings could be revised to be clearer. Providing simpler explanations or examples may help make the content more accessible to readers not familiar with specific jargon.

5. Use of Passive and Active Voice: Consider balancing passive and active voice to maintain academic neutrality while ensuring the text remains engaging and dynamic where appropriate.

Author Response

We appreciate the thoughtful feedback provided by the reviewer on our manuscript. Their insightful comments have greatly contributed to the enhancement of our study. In response to the reviewer's valuable feedback, we have carefully revised certain sections of our manuscript to ensure its clarity, rigor, and relevance. Please find below the revisions we have made in accordance with the reviewer's suggestions:

Abstract:

We appreciate the reviewer's comments on our manuscript. In agreement with the reviewer's suggestions, we have revised our abstract to better reflect the main focus of our study. Accordingly, we have included an introductory statement at the beginning of the abstract, as follows (Page 1, Lines 8-12):

• “The evolving nature of contemporary careers has sparked an interest in the sustainability of individual careers, which encompasses the pursuit of careers in a manner that promotes health, productivity, and overall happiness. Although previous studies have provided valuable perspectives on sustainable careers, there remains a notable lack of evidence regarding the interplay between individual and whole-life contextual determinants in crafting sustainable careers. Therefore, …”

Furthermore, to better clarify the intended contributions, we have revised the final part of the abstract as follows (Page 1, Lines 23-26):

• “Highlighting the importance of a whole-life perspective in career development, which involves work and family contexts, this study reveals the integral role of career proactivity and its interplay with contextual determinants in building sustainable careers.”

Method:

Following the methodological recommendations of the reviewer, we included a methodological flowchart that describes the research procedures we adopted in the study (See Page 8, Figure 2). Moreover, we rearranged the content of the subsection of 3.1. Participants and Procedure to better clarify the research procedures and enhance methodological transparency.

Furthermore, in light of the reviewer's feedback, we provided a more detailed reporting and discussion of the CFA model fit results. Accordingly, we included NNFI scores in the results regarding model fit. Please see the revised version below (Page 9, Lines 390-403):

• “We evaluated the construct validity by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) via IBM SPSS Amos. The CFA results revealed that the hypothesized second-order 10-factor measurement model fits adequately (χ2=2076.43, df=1324, χ2/df=1.57, CFI=0.94, NNFI=0.93, SRMR=0.047, RMSEA=0.037). … Additionally, we compared the hypothesized model with alternative models. The results indicated that the first-order 15-factor measurement model demonstrated a good fit (χ2=1965.39, df=1272, χ2/df=1.54, CFI=0.95, NNFI=0.94, SRMR=0.051, RMSEA=0.062), while one factor model indicated an overall poor fit (χ2=8754.62, df=1377, χ2/df=6.36, CFI=0.40, NNFI=0.38, SRMR=0.120, RMSEA=0.114) (see Table 1). Considering that both the hypothesized second-order model and the first-order model fit the data well and the statistical difference between these models is rather minor, we continued the analyses with the initial hypothesized second-order model.”

In addition, to avoid a potential methodological misinterpretation, it's important to note that we did not test our hypotheses using structural equation modeling. Instead, after presenting the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) measurement model fit results and offering statistical evidence for construct validity and reliability, we performed Hierarchical Regression Analyses and Process Macro Analyses via SPSS to assess the predicted direct and indirect effects. In the subsection of 4.2. Hypothesis Tests, we clearly stated which analyses were performed to test the research hypotheses and defined the methodological procedures.

Conclusion:

As for the conclusion and discussing the findings, we have carefully reconsidered and revised the discussion section to address the specific points raised. The enhanced version includes a deep reflection on theoretical and practical implications, delving into the meaning of our findings for the field of sustainable careers.

Additionally, we have emphasized the theoretical contributions and practical/managerial implications of the study, underscoring its relevance to both academics and practitioners. These modifications aim to provide greater clarity and depth to the research, and we believe they significantly enrich the manuscript.

Enhancing the Quality of English Language:

We have thoroughly examined and revised the manuscript to ensure consistency in the use of key terms related to sustainable careers, simplify sentence structures where necessary without compromising complexity, correct any minor grammatical errors, improve punctuation for enhanced sentence flow, and clarify complex ideas by providing simpler explanations or examples. Additionally, we have carefully balanced the use of passive and active voice to maintain academic neutrality while ensuring an engaging and dynamic text where appropriate. We believe these enhancements contribute to the overall clarity and readability of the paper. Thank you for guiding us towards improving the quality of English in the manuscript.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I am writing to provide feedback on your research paper titled "Contextual and Individual Determinants of Sustainable Careers: A Serial Indirect Effect Model Through Career Crafting and Person-Career Fit" submitted to the journal Sustainability.

Firstly, I would like to commend you on the rigorous approach and comprehensive analysis presented in your manuscript. Your study makes significant contributions to the understanding of sustainable careers, particularly through the exploration of both contextual and individual determinants.

However, to enhance the clarity and impact of your paper, I have provided detailed suggestions for improvement in three key sections: the introduction, theoretical background, and discussion.

 Introduction:

·       Clarify the Research Gap: Clearly articulate the gap in the existing literature that this study aims to address. What specific aspect of sustainable careers has not been adequately explored, and how does this study contribute to filling that gap?

·       Highlight the Novelty of the Approach: Emphasize what sets this study apart from previous research. Is it the integration of the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory with the framework of sustainable careers? Is it the focus on both contextual and individual determinants simultaneously?

·       Provide a Clear Research Objective: While the introduction outlines the general aim of investigating contextual and individual determinants of sustainable careers, it could benefit from a more specific research objective.

 Theoretical Background:

·       Define Key Concepts: Ensure that key concepts, such as career crafting, person-career fit, and sustainable careers, are clearly defined early on in the introduction. This will help readers unfamiliar with these concepts to understand the framework of the study.

·       Discuss Contextual Determinants: Provide a thorough discussion of the contextual determinants of sustainable careers, including work and family demands/resources. Explain how these factors influence individual career behaviors and outcomes, drawing on the COR theory to support your arguments.

 

Discussion:

·       Provide specific examples: Consider providing specific examples or cases from the study data to illustrate how contextual demands and resources influence career crafting and person-career fit. This can enhance the clarity and depth of understanding for readers.

·       Practical Implications: Expand on the practical implications for organizations and individual professionals by providing more specific recommendations or strategies they can implement to support sustainable career development.

·       Future Research: Emphasize the importance of addressing the limitations identified in the study for future research to build upon the current findings and advance knowledge in the field of sustainable careers.

 Overall, your research has the potential to make a significant contribution to the literature on sustainable careers. I encourage you to consider these suggestions as you revise your manuscript for resubmission.

 Thank you for considering my feedback, and I look forward to seeing the revised version of your paper.

 

 

Best regards.

Author Response

We appreciate the thoughtful feedback provided by the reviewer on our manuscript. Their insightful comments have greatly contributed to the enhancement of our study. In response to the reviewer's valuable feedback, we have carefully revised certain sections of our manuscript to ensure its clarity, rigor, and relevance. Please find below the revisions we have made in accordance with the reviewer's suggestions:

Introduction:

We appreciate your insightful comments and queries regarding the introduction section of our manuscript. We have revisited the introduction section in light of your recommendations on clarifying the research gap, highlighting the novelty of the approach, providing a clear research objective, and defining key concepts.

Clarifying the Research Gap:

We acknowledge the importance of clearly articulating the unique contribution of our research in advancing the understanding of sustainable careers. In response to your inquiry, we have revised the manuscript to explicitly outline the gap in the existing literature that our study aims to address. Specifically, we highlight the scarce evidence regarding how the interaction between contextual characteristics and individual proactive mechanisms influences the pursuing of sustainable careers. Furthermore, we have provided a succinct explanation of the specific aspect of sustainable careers that has not been adequately explored and how our study contributes to filling that gap. Through investigating the interplay between contextual (work/family demands and resources) and individual determinants (career crafting, person-career fit), our research aims to address existing gaps in understanding sustainable careers.

Please see Page 2, Lines 58-60 and Lines 73-76 below:

• “… the existing literature has offered scant evidence regarding how the interaction between contextual characteristics and individual proactive mechanisms influences building sustainable careers.”
• “Addressing the existing gaps in the understanding of sustainable careers, we aim to investigate the interplay between contextual (i.e., work/family demands and resources) and individual determinants (i.e., career crafting, person-career fit) in building sustainable careers.”

We also underscore the importance of adopting a holistic perspective that considers both work and non-work domains to provide a comprehensive understanding of the contextual dynamics influencing sustainable careers. Moreover, by integrating the framework of sustainable careers with the Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory, we aim to elucidate how perceived contextual demands and resources motivate individuals to engage in proactive career crafting behaviors, thus contributing to the behavioral predictors of sustainable careers Additionally, we have clarified the rationale behind testing a serial indirect effect model to explore the interplay between contextual and individual determinants of sustainable careers.

Please see Page 3, Lines 102-110 and Lines 115-121 below:

• “Adopting a perspective highlighting work and non-work domains may provide a better insight into the contextual dynamics of sustainable careers [2,9]. Moreover, by integrating the framework of sustainable careers [5] with the COR Theory [20], we attempt to explain how perceived contextual demands and resources motivate individuals to engage in proactivity to craft sustainable careers (e.g., conserving or investing in valuable career resources). Second, we examine career crafting and person-career fit as individual predictors of career sustainability indicators. Considering the lack of evidence on the relationship between sustainable careers and individuals’ career proactivity, results can enhance our understanding of the behavioral predictors of sustainable careers.”
• “… we test a serial indirect effect model, which focuses on the relationship between contextual demands/resources and career sustainability indicators sequentially through career crafting and person-career fit. Such an approach may help us explore the interplay between the contextual and individual determinants of sustainable careers. Overall, this study aims to contribute to the current understanding of sustainable careers regarding contextual and individual dynamics.”

 Overall, we believe that the revisions made to the manuscript adequately address your questions and provide a clear articulation of the gap in the literature and our study's contribution to filling that gap. We appreciate your valuable feedback and remain committed to enhancing the clarity and rigor of our research.

Highlighting the Novelty of the Approach:

The primary novelty of our approach lies in its emphasis on examining the interplay between contextual and individual determinants of sustainable careers. In addition to prior evidence, our study integrates both aspects concurrently, thereby offering a valuable contribution. Specifically, we explore how contextual characteristics interact with individual proactive mechanisms, such as career crafting and person-career fit, to influence the building of sustainable careers. This integration allows us to provide a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics shaping sustainable careers, thereby contributing to filling a significant gap in the existing literature. While the integration of the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory with the framework of sustainable careers indeed forms a crucial part of our approach, it is the simultaneous examination of contextual and individual determinants that distinguishes our study from previous research. We believe this approach enhances the richness of our findings and advances the field's understanding of sustainable careers.

Providing a Clear Research Objective:

We have revisited the introduction section to provide a more specific research objective that aligns with the aim of investigating both contextual and individual determinants of sustainable careers. The revised introduction now clearly articulates our research objective, focusing on examining the interplay between contextual characteristics (such as work/family demands and resources) and individual mechanisms (including career crafting and person-career fit) in the development of sustainable careers. We believe this refinement enhances the clarity of our study's aims and objectives.

Defining Key Concepts:

Following your recommendation, we have revised the manuscript to provide clear and concise definitions of key concepts such as career crafting, person-career fit, and sustainable careers early on in the introduction.

Please see the changes on Page 1, Lines 41-44 and Page 2, Lines 63-72 below:

• “As conceptualized by De Vos et al. [5], a sustainable career encompasses a series of career experiences that dynamically change over time, span diverse social contexts, and are driven by individual proactivity, thereby contributing to a sense of meaning.”
• “… as a form of career proactivity, the concept of career crafting has recently gained scholarly interest [16,17], holding the potential to elucidate proactive mechanisms within sustainable careers. Career crafting broadly refers to proactive initiatives aimed at optimizing one’s career outcomes through improving person-career fit [18]. Such proactive career crafting initiatives include reflecting positive career meaning, changing relational boundaries, utilizing relational resources, or expanding task boundaries [16]. Hence, by crafting their careers, individuals can reach a better person-career fit, which broadly refers to the consistency between individuals' career experiences and their values, aspirations, interests, and skills [18,19], thereby building more sustainable careers.”

Theoretical Background:

Thank you for the recommendation regarding the theoretical background of contextual determinants of sustainable careers. We have revised the relevant subsection accordingly to incorporate these elements. Specifically, we have integrated the COR theory to elucidate how individuals, faced with intense contextual demands in work and family, may engage in proactive career initiatives to manage these challenges effectively. Moreover, we have expanded on the role of family-supportive supervisory and work-supportive family as valuable cross-domain resources, as per the COR theory. Our arguments now highlight how these supportive contexts can motivate individuals to engage in career crafting behaviors aimed at shaping sustainable careers.

Please see the revised parts of the 2.3 Contextual Determinants subsection below:

• Page 5-6, Lines 238-245: "In this regard, drawing on the COR Theory [20], we predict that individuals perceiving relatively more intense contextual demands may be more oriented to take proactive career initiatives, such as seeking new resources or utilizing existing resources more efficiently to deal with the increasing contextual demands. For example, people can proactively reach out for assistance from supervisors or colleagues, which can aid them in managing increasingly demanding work responsibilities. Alternatively, the ones experiencing high family demands may proactively seek different jobs that can tolerate more flexible work-family arrangements, thereby crafting a more sustainable career."
• Page 6, Lines 261-266: "Based on the COR Theory, a family-supportive supervisory may represent a valuable cross-domain resource for the individuals, which can motivate them to engage in career crafting to shape a more sustainable career. For instance, supervisors’ supportive manner towards the employees’ childcare responsibilities may lead them to better plan their workdays, thereby reducing their stress and improving their work performance."
• Page 6, Lines 270-275: "From the theoretical perspective of the COR Theory, a work-supportive family can also be a valuable cross-domain resource for individuals. Such a resource can act as a motivator, encouraging individuals to craft their careers, optimize person-career fit, and build more sustainable careers. For example, receiving emotional support from a spouse after a difficult day at work can help one optimize psychological well-being and refocus on career goals."

These revisions aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of how contextual determinants influence individual career behaviors and outcomes, grounded in the theoretical framework of the COR theory. We believe that these enhancements contribute significantly to the clarity and depth of our discussion on contextual determinants of sustainable careers.

Discussion:

Providing Specific Examples:

We appreciate the suggestion to provide specific examples from the study data in the discussion section to illustrate how contextual demands and resources influence career crafting and person-career fit. In response, we have integrated illustrative examples derived from our study data to enhance the clarity and depth of understanding for readers.

Please see the revisions below:

• Page 16, Lines 592-598: "... results indicated that individuals perceiving higher resources in the work and family contexts (e.g., family-supportive supervisory, work-supportive family) were more likely to engage in career crafting and thus enhance their person-career fit. To illustrate, a supervisor's understanding approach towards the employees’ dependent care responsibilities, such as planning more flexible shifts for them, may support employees in better utilizing relational resources, thereby reaching an enhanced and sustainable person-career fit."
• Page 16, Lines 601-609: "Accordingly, results demonstrated that individuals with higher work and family demands were more likely to engage in career crafting and hence improve their person-career fit. For instance, employees can proactively seek support from colleagues or supervisors, which can help them deal with demanding work responsibilities. Thus, they can craft their relational resources at work and reach a better person-career fit. Or, employees possessing demanding family responsibilities, such as eldercare or childcare, may proactively search for different job opportunities that can involve flexible work-family arrangements, thereby crafting an optimized person-career fit in a sustainable way."

Practical Implications:

We appreciate the recommendation to expand on the practical implications for organizations and professionals in supporting sustainable career development. In response, we have enriched the manuscript by providing more specific recommendations and strategies that organizational practitioners can implement.

Please see the revisions below:

• Page 17, Lines 662-669: "Building a workplace culture valuing the balance between work and family contexts might reflect one of the key initiatives for a sustainable workforce [1,61]. More specifically, organizational practitioners may assist employees in understanding how their career goals can affect their family lives and help them develop strategies to achieve both work and family goals effectively by utilizing available resources and overcoming potential barriers [9]. Such organizational initiatives may produce customized solutions for individual careers that can foster sustainable career development."
• Page 17, Lines 682-693: "In this sense, organizations might support individual initiatives by providing career crafting training or intervention programs that illuminate how employees proactively optimize their person-career fit, thereby building more sustainable careers [62]. For example, such training programs may involve discussing proactive strategies about how one can reach career goals by crafting relational boundaries (e.g., exercising proactive networking), crafting task boundaries (e.g., developing a set of career skills and competencies), or crafting a personally meaningful career. In addition, for organizations to comprehensively support sustainable careers, it is essential to empower employees to clarify their sustainability goals and motivate them to ask for customized career arrangements (e.g., flexible work or sabbatical) [48]. Such an organizational approach may help employees build self-awareness in their career trajectories and enable them to collaboratively construct meaning in their careers, thus crafting more sustainable careers [48]."

Future Research:

We appreciate the suggestion to emphasize the importance of addressing the limitations identified in the study for future research. In response, we have revisited the manuscript and highlighted the significance of addressing these limitations to advance knowledge in the field of sustainable careers.

Additionally, we have underscored the transformative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals’ career sustainability experiences, initiatives, and accessibility. We suggest that this unprecedented global event presents an exciting opportunity for future research to delve deeper into these dynamics, particularly through comprehensive in-depth interviews. Therefore, we are committed to encouraging further investigation into these areas to enhance our understanding of sustainable careers in the post-pandemic era and beyond.