MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083205868 · doi:10.1002/job.705

Crossing national boundaries: A typology of qualified immigrants' career orientations

2010· article· en· W2083205868 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jelena Zikic, Jaime Bonache, Jean‐Luc Cerdin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Organizational Behavior · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTypologyProactivityPsychologyInterdependencePerspective (graphical)Identity (music)ImmigrationSocial psychologySalience (neuroscience)Career developmentSociologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This qualitative study examines objective–subjective career interdependencies within a sample of 45 qualified immigrants (QIs) in Canada, Spain and France. The particular challenges in this type of self‐initiated international careers arise from the power of institutions and local gatekeepers, the lack of recognition for QIs' foreign career capital, and the need for proactivity. Resulting from primary data analysis, we identify six major themes in QIs' subjective interpretations of objective barriers: Maintaining motivation, managing identity, developing new credentials, developing local know‐how, building a new social network and evaluating career success. Secondary data analysis distinguishes three QI career orientations—embracing, adaptive and resisting orientations—with each portraying distinct patterns of motivation, identity and coping. This study extends the boundaryless career perspective by providing a more fine‐grained understanding of how qualified migrants manage both physical and psychological mobility during self‐initiated international career transitions. With regards to the interdependence between objective and subjective career aspects, it illustrates the importance of avoiding preference to one side at the neglect of the other, or treating the two sides as independent of one another. Practical implications are proposed for career management efforts and receiving economies. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations189
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Organizational BehaviorSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207