Validity Evidence of the CAAS in Brazilians with Higher Education

Evidências de Validade da EAC em Brasileiros com Educação Superior

Evidencias de Validez de la EAC en Brasileños con Educación Superior

Marília Cammarosano

Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil

Lucy Leal Melo-Silva

Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil

José Egídio Barbosa Oliveira

Universidade do Porto, Portugal

The world is currently experiencing rapid changes in human and professional relations with impacts on the market, which has become more dynamic, unpredictable, and unstable. In this scenario, the complexity of both interpersonal relations and production means influence the lives of individuals as well as groups. In terms of labor, one may observe the creation of new professions, the dynamic and complex nature of roles, borderless careers, as well as the constant demand for professional qualification. Socioeconomic changes all over the world have accentuated problems related to the lack of quality of life at work, to unemployment, and to the more frequent career transitions for young people and adults (Duarte, 2013; Note, Ginevra, & Soresi, 2012).

Market dynamics and instability increasingly require professionals to be able to adapt to changes which directly affect their professional and personal lives. Super’s (1957, 1980) career development theory was based on empirical research that took place over sixty years. It allows the understanding that career development occurs throughout life due to a set of evolutionary and vocational tasks (Ambiel, 2014; Lassance, Paradiso, & Silva, 2011). In the 1970s and 1980s, Donald Super had already pointed to the importance and influence of market instability on career development (Super & Knasel, 1981), with an intensification of studies on the subject in the last decades of the twentieth century.

The Super Vocational Development Theory consolidated in three segments: development of vocational maturity aimed at career adaptability, self-concept, and context (Life Span, Life Space Theory), as Lassance, Paradiso e Silva (2011) point out, noting that Super incorporated the changes in the world of work from the 1970s onwards. Thus, vocational issues should be understood as part of a process linked to human development in a life span as well as in a life space dimension, which refers to the social situations and roles that each one encounters throughout life, being the self the element that integrates this experience.

Such theory considers the longitudinal dimension of career development. It occurs over a sequence of stages, which Super defined as maxicycles denominated as growth (childhood, from zero to 14 years), exploration (adolescence, from 15 to 24 years), establishment (young adult, from 25 to 44 years), maintenance (maturity, from 45 to 64 years), and disengagement (old age, from 65 years and over). Throughout these vocational stages (maxicicles) one is also faced with transitions in the same stage of career (minicicles) (Lassance & Sarriera, 2012; Lassance, Paradiso, & Silva, 2011; Savickas, 2005). In these transitional moments, the individual must update the tasks of exploration (search for an alternative), establishment (insertion in a new activity), and maintenance (assertion in the new activity), thus readapting to the context of change (Lassance, Paradiso, & Silva, 2011). Hence, considering career development through maxicycles and that individuals face transitions between such stages and even within them, one may argue that the adaptability process takes place throughout this course (Savickas, 1997), which is intensified by the instability of the current work context.

Initially, Super (1980) presented the concept of vocational maturity, whose definition emphasizes a person’s willingness to face evolutionary tasks in their development. According to Ambiel (2014), this concept had great theoretical importance for understanding teenager vocational development, since once the vocational maturity was established, the young adult could then trace his or her mostly linear professional trajectory. Through the improvement which resulted from studies and from understanding the modern work context, while considering the adult population, Super et al. (1996) proposed substituting the vocational maturity concept with career adaptability in order to better describe the phases in this development stage. In 1997, Savickas proposed such substitution for the whole life cycle due to expressive changes in the labor market (Audibert & Teixeira, 2015; Fiorini, Bardagi, & Silva, 2016).

The concept of career adaptability was built and improved as based on a more current constructivist context through research by authors such as Mark Savickas (2005). Such concept as based on more recent definitions and research efforts refers to an individual’s ability to deal with career trauma, turbulence, and transitions, which is a very current reality considering the dynamic and unstable work environment established in the 21st century (Ambiel, 2014; Savickas, 2005; Savickas et al., 2009; Lassance, Paradiso, & Silva, 2011).

Career adaptability is, therefore, a multidimensional construct composed of four factors or dimensions, used as resources by the individual to manage transitions throughout the process of building his/ her career, as asserted by Savickas (2005) and Duarte, et al. (2009). These dimensions, known as the “four Cs”, are the following: (a) concern, which refers to the concern about one’s professional future, leading the individual to plan, anticipate, and prepare for diverse professional situations; (b) control, which refers to feeling responsible for constructing one’s own career, resulting in decision-making to determine the professional future and confrontation with vocational issues; (c) curiosity, which refers to the initiative of making discoveries and searching for alternatives and job opportunities; it involves exploring occupational options and interaction with the labor market; and (d) confidence, which refers to confidence with respect to career issues and to one’s ability to do things well, i.e., to what extent the individual feels capable of achieving his or her professional goals even in the face of obstacles (Ambiel, 2014; Savickas, 2005).

According to Savickas (1997, 2005), the four dimensions (or four Cs) encompass processes which are essencial to a proper career development and must be carefully observed and investigated considering the modern work market. Thus, the most adaptable individuals would be those capable of concern for their professional future, of feeling in control of their own careers, of searching for new job opportunities, and of being confident regarding their competence to achieve professional goals in the face of obstacles. Within the Life Design paradigm’s assumptions, career adaptability is one of the central goals of professional orientation or career counseling intervention involving such an approach (Ribeiro, 2011).

In 2009, Savickas and colleagues proposed a fifth dimension of career adaptability named commitment. Such dimension can be found in studies carried out by Einarsdóttir, Vilhjálmsdóttir, Smáradóttir, and Kjartansdóttir (2015) in an Irish sample, and recently in a more detailed analysis of the five-factor instrument (Nye, Leong, Prasad, Gardner, & Tien, 2017). This dimension points to the fact that indecision in career choice cannot be discarded, thus leading the individual to be active when facing new possibilities and experiments.

Our literature review will restrict itself to the analysis of the career adaptability construct in terms of the first four dimensions, which are part of measurement instruments and most commonly referenced in several recent studies in this research field (Fiorini et al., 2016).

The importance of studying the career adaptability construct prompted the meeting of a group of psychologists to develop and test the validity of an international instrument, with the purpose of measuring career adaptability in different countries and cultural scenarios. Such efforts resulted in the Career Adapt-Ability Scale (CAAS) (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), which was adapted and validated for Brazil (Audibert & Teixeira, 2015; Teixeira et al., 2012). This instrument has been used in various studies in Brazil and worldwide, and its psychometric properties have been tested in different cultures (Duarte et al., 2009; Chan & Mai, 2015; Ghosh & Fouad, 2016; McKenna, Zacher, Ardabili, & Mohebbi, 2016; Negru-subtirica, Pop, & Crocetti, 2015; Olugbade, 2016).

The original version of the instrument was comprised of 25 items divided into subscales which made up the four dimensions. After the initial studies, the international scale was altered to comprise 44 items, eleven for each dimension. This version was then tested in thirteen countries in order to verify its structure, reliability, and validity, finally reaching a version with 24 items (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). In 2017, Maggiori, Rossier, and Savickas published a reduced version of the scale with twelve items in order to facilitate the various research efforts conducted in recent years on career adaptability. Research results have been showing good validity and reliability indices for this version and a strong association with the original CAAS.

According to Teixeira et al. (2012), the first version of the Brazilian career adaptability scale (CAAS) departed from a version of the Portuguese scale, whose items were analyzed by a group of specialists on professional guidance investigations involved with research on career adaptability. The final version of the Brazilian instrument consisted of 22 items and presented good to very good internal consistency indices (Hair Jr., Babin, Money, & Samouel, 2005): concern (0.83), control (0.74), curiosity (0.79), and confidence (0.82).

To review and test the validity of the Brazilian CAAS, given the fact that it ended up with a different number of items when compared to that of other countries, Audibert and Teixeira (2015) submitted the instrument to an exploratory and confirmatory factorial analysis using responses from 990 university students. Results showed good to excellent reliability indices (between 0.83 and 0.94) for a scale version comprised of 24 items, six for each dimension. Hence, this is the latest version published in the literature related to the Brazilian CAAS. The authors consider the need to carry out nationwide research with participants with different education levels, since their study was conducted with a homogeneous sample composed of university students mainly from the metropolitan area of Porto Alegre, Brazil.

A recent study by Ambiel, Carvalho, Martins, and Tofoli (2016) presented the results of a study comparing teenager and adult workers regarding career adaptability in which they used the Brazilian version of the CAAS with 24 items. The instrument’s structure was tested yielding good to acceptable results, with some items being singled out for reflection and revision. Rudolph, Lavigne, & Zacher (2017) have shown that, with the publication of the CAAS, empirical research on career adaptability has evidenced great growth since 2012, and in 2015 alone more than 50 articles can be found on the international literature. In Brazil, Fiorini, Bardagi, & Silva (2016) also illustrate the increase in national publications, presenting a review of the five published articles on the construct.

Recent research efforts have shown the existence of many variables that may be related to the concept of adaptability (Rudolph, Lavigne, & Zacher, 2017). Being adaptability, both predicted, and a predictor of other variables translated in measures, responses, or adaptation results. Variables such as values (Lassance & Sarriera, 2012); vocational identity (Negru-subtirica et al., 2015); self-efficacy (Guan et al., 2013); self-esteem (Cai et al., 2015); personality (Bargadi & Albanaes, 2015; Guan et al., 2017); professional success and turnover intent (Guan et al, 2015; Chan, Mai, Kuok, & Kong, 2016); entrepreneurship (McKenna et al, 2016; Tolentino et al., 2014); impostor syndrome or phenomenon (Neureiter & Traut-Mattaush, 2017); career involvement (Nilforooshan & Salimi, 2017); among others, have been investigated by various authors in recent studies. Different methods were used such as quantitative, qualitative, and longitudinal studies (Autin, Douglass, Duffy, England, & Allan, 2017; Guan et al, 2017; Guan et al., 2013, 2015; Negru-subtirica et al., 2015; Rudolph, Lavigne, & Zacher, 2017). Career adaptability is thus a construct that is being studied worldwide with different populations and in diverse western and eastern countries, which illustrates its importance for professional guidance and career counseling and even for human resources management in organizations. The ability to adapt is now a widespread requirement in the context of a work market characterized by profound changes in the last decades.

From the literature review, one may notice that the research has been performed mostly with samples of undergraduate students (Guan et al., 2017; Kohen, Klehe, & Vianen, 2012; Nilforooshan & Salimi, 2017; Presbitero & Quita, 2017; Shin & Lee, 2017). There even exists a Portuguese version of the CAAS adapted for that population (Monteiro & Almeida, 2015). There are also studies with samples of technology students (Silva & Gamboa, 2014), senior students (Ghosh & Fouad, 2016), postgraduate students (Autin et al., 2017; Chong & Leong, 2017; Douglass & Duffy, 2015; Guan et al., 2015), and young adults (Creed, Fallon, & Hood, 2009). Recent studies have also investigated the adaptability dimensions in samples composed of teenagers and high school students (Ambiel et al., 2016; Ginevra, Pallini, Vecchio, Nota, & Soresi, 2016). There are, thus, research gaps regarding the adult population of more mature aged groups or holding other educational credentials. This study aims at helping to fill some of those gaps.

Despite being already a relatively well-defined construct, investigations must continue to improve the career adaptability concept, as well as its measurement instruments, in order to understand its relationship with other variables which are fundamental in career development and transition processes. Moreover, Brazil still lacks research on the construct in question (Fiorini et al., 2016). The understanding of career adaptability in different contexts and relative to diverse variables is essential given the instability of the work market, in which labor relations become increasingly unpredictable, thus requiring the individual to adapt to the liquidity of imposed situations.

The latest Brazilian version of the CAAS was published by Audibert and Teixeira (2015). They pointed out the importance of studies with populations of various educational levels in order to further test its validity. Given the prominence of the construct in the literature review, which showed the importance of improving the Brazilian version of this instrument, this study aimed to test the evidence of validity of Audibert and Teixeira’s (2015) version of the career adaptability scale (CAAS) in a sample consisted of Brazilians with complete higher education, specifically testing for the invariance of its structure according to sex. Additionally, possible gender differences are tested for the four dimensions of adaptability that make up the scale.

The present study aimed at assessing gender differences in the Brazilian population, both with respect to the Career Adaptability Scale as a measure of professional adaptability, as well as with respect to each of the factors or constructs that compose it. Thus, in an initial step, the invariance of the CAAS for men and women was tested. Secondly, it was assessed whether there were differences between men and women in relation to the factors that make up the scale: Concern, Curiosity, Confidence and Control. Results evidenced the invariance of CAAS according to gender and also the absence of differences between men and women in relation to the four dimensions of adaptability measured by the scale.

In line with results from numerous studies already conducted in different cultures, as evidenced by the meta-analysis by Rudolph, Lavigne & Zacher (2017), the results here observed contribute to reinforcing the consistency of the CAAS as a measure of career adaptability. Such consistency has been proven over the last few years through its testing in populations with different demographic characteristics (eg. age, gender, educational level) (eg Zacher, 2014; Hirschi, 2009), as well as through the observation of its association with other measures of adaptability (eg. cognitive abilities, personality traits, self-esteem, proactive personality, hope, optimism), adaptive responses (career planning, career adaptation, occupational self-efficacy, self-efficacy for career decision making) and adaptive outcomes (eg career identity, career satisfaction, commitment to the organization, work stress, employability, entrepreneurship, life satisfaction) (eg. Rudolph, Lavigne & Zacher, 2017). The observation of the invariance of the scale according to sex, in the context of the Brazilian culture, constitutes a new contribution that reinforces its validity, evidencing its good psychometric properties in an increasingly varied range of cultures and sociodemographic groups. This fact points to a continuous consolidation of the career adaptability construct, as defined and operationalized in the career construction theory and general career guidance (Savickas, 2013), as a central concept for the development of career paths in a historical time and context in which these are characterized by high levels of uncertainty, unpredictability and marked by numerous changes and transitions throughout life. A context that requires the development and operationalization of constant adaptive skills: a constant work of preparation for future career challenges (Concern); the assumption of responsibility for the development of one’s professional career (Control); the exploration of possible identities and professional opportunities (Curiosity); the belief in the ability to solve problems related to the professional path (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). The invariance of the CAAS structure in multiple cultural and sociodemographic contexts allows its use in multiple sociocultural contexts and subsequent performance of successive comparisons of results within a theoretical framework in a process of increasing empirical consolidation.

With regard to gender and gender issues, previous studies have provided contradictory results influenced by cultural aspects. By way of example, Hou, Leung, Li, Li, & Xu, (2012), in a study of Chinese students, found that men evidence more career adaptability than women. Contrary to this finding, other studies report the lack of differences between men and women in terms of career adaptability (eg Hirschi, 2009). Sociocultural factors certainly give ground to such disparate research results when gender and gender issues are involved. In view of such disparities, it is important to test the existence of differences in various cultures in order to understand what factors may be causing the variability of results so far observed in the literature. With this purpose, we compared the results in the four dimensions of career adaptability between men and women in our sample. As reported, no differences were observed according to sex. This seems to point to the growing gender equality of Western cultures in terms of careers and career paths. While there are still significant gender inequalities (for example, in terms of salary, in terms of representativeness in managerial positions, in terms of work-family balance), it also seems evident that both sexes seem equally affected by relevant changes that have been taking place in the world of work in recent decades. One of the changes that seems to affect equally man and women refers to the constant increase in the levels of uncertainty, precariousness and volatility of labor relations. Career pathways are less and less linear, driven by innumerable changes and transitions. They call for the development of individual career management skills, irrespective of gender, in a context that is constantly changing, therefore demanding increasingly higher levels of professional adaptability. It may be said that if, on the one hand, steps are needed to achieve full equality between men and women in the work sphere, on the other, men and women are equally affected by labor changes that have introduced heightened levels of uncertainty and insecurity to their career paths. Given that Brazil is no exception to such changes in the world of work as well as in the changes in gender relations dynamics, the need to develop and put into practice adaptive capacities in a changing labor context seems to be common to both sexes, also in the Brazilian society.

This paper contributes to the empirical consolidation of career adaptability studies. It is a body of research with increasing relevance in the context of today’s labor markets due to the need to respond to increasing non-linearity, constant mutability and the coping with periods of transition of professional paths. Future studies in the Brazilian sociocultural context will be necessary to assess career adaptability in relation to other socially relevant demographic variables such as socioeconomic level, ethnicity, level of education, training area, geographic location. The continuous development of a relevant body of knowledge about career adaptability will surely be a significant contribution to both designing and implementing intervention projects in career guidance and to the elaboration of public policies in this area.