Revisiting the Career Anchor Model: A Proposition and an Empirical Investigation of a New Model of Career Value Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study proposes an original model of career values organized in a circular logic. The new career value structure consists of four quadrants opposed in pairs (bureaucratic self-concept versus protean self-concept, and careerist self-concept versus social self-concept). Contrary to Schein’s model, which rests on the dominance of a single career anchor, our model organizes career anchors according to attraction and repulsion, which may explain the existence of several dominant anchors. Based on a sample of 240 employees and 155 managers in the healthcare sector, a new instrument to measure career values was validated. Four quadrants emerged from the multidimensional analysis. Hypotheses regarding the links between quadrants of career values and career anchors were largely supported by multiple regression analysis. Notably, the managerial career anchor is significantly linked to the careerist self-concept, whereas the service anchor is significantly associated with the social self-concept. The study also affirmed hypotheses linking the quadrants to other variables like collectivism and proactive behaviors. Accordingly, collectivism is significantly linked to the social self-concept, whereas proactive behaviors are connected to the protean self-concept. Not only was the structure model verified empirically, but the construct validity of the new instrument was also demonstrated. This study also clarifies several problems related to career anchors, such as career anchor structures or ambiguity inherent in some career anchor measurement indicators.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".