MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Conceptualization, Measurement, And Influence of a Millennial Career Mindset

2019· article· en· W2965805745 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vanessa Shum, Christopher D. Zatzick, Bin Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetConceptualizationEmployabilityPsychologyJob satisfactionWorkforceSocial psychologyCareer developmentContext (archaeology)Organizational commitmentPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study extends research on generational differences beyond stereotypes and demographic differences to the development of a mindset towards careers. Because Millennials grew up in a labor market with less job stability, more contingent work, and a rapidly changing global marketplace, we theorize the development of a multidimensional millennial career mindset (MCM) that encompasses the underlying implicit theories and beliefs that emerge from the millennial context. Specifically, we focus on four dimensions of the MCM: job-hopping norm, self-directed career development, social media embracement, and perceived employability. While all participants in the modern workforce are shaped by the context, we expect the MCM will be stronger for Millennials than non-Millennials. We also hypothesize that the relationship between job satisfaction and withdrawal intentions will be weaker for those individuals possessing a stronger MCM. We collected data from 115 employees at a Canadian organization and found that a MCM moderated the relationships between job satisfaction and organizational commitment and turnover intentions. The findings suggest that job satisfaction is less pertinent to influencing the stay intentions of employees with a strong MCM.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207