تاثیر رضایت و ترویج در رابطه بین سازگاری شغلی و تصمیم های کاری  The influence of satisfaction and promotability on the relation between career adaptability and turnover intentions

1. Introduction One’s ability to develop and to navigate career role transitions in the increasingly borderless global arena in the work and occupational context has attracted the attention of numerous scholars (e.g., Koen, Van Vianen, & Klehe, 2012; Maggiori, Johnston, Krings, Massoudi, & Rossier, 2013; Savickas, 1997; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012; Zacher, Ambiel, & Noronha, 2015). One of the most relevant constructs for individuals to approach employment and reemployment in this postmodern chaotic society is career adaptability (Savickas et al., 2009). This psychosocial resource (Savickas, 1997), signifies one’s resources and readiness for managing current and anticipated tasks, transitions, and traumas in one’s occupational roles (Savickas, 2005). Career adaptability (CA) is a useful concept to evaluate an individual’s strength, which enables self-preparation for future occupational changes (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012), helping employees fit into their work environment and effectively manage their career changes and challenges (Savickas, 1997; Zacher et al., 2015). It also facilitates their mobility (Ito & Brotheridge, 2005), and is related to many work and life outcomes including turnover, career satisfaction, success, job performance evaluations, promotability, work engagement, career commitment, self-esteem and well-being (e.g., Chan & Mai, 2015; Guan et al., 2013; Koen et al., 2012; Maggiori et al., 2013; Porfeli & Savickas, 2012; Tolentino, Garcia, Restubog, Bordia, & Tang, 2013; Van Vianen, Klehe, Koen, & Dries, 2012). But research linking CA, career satisfaction (CS), and turnover intentions (TI) is not well integrated (Chan & Mai, 2015). In recent research CA positively predicted CS and negatively predicted TI of low-ranking employees (Chan & Mai, 2015). It also appears that employees with low CA scores might quit their job (Ferreira, Coetzee, & Masenge, 2013; Omar & Noordin, 2013). In spite of the recent progress, questions on the roles of mediators in the career adaptability–turnover intentions (CA–TI) model remain. For instance, little is known about the influence of intraorganizational mobility and CS, which effects employees’ decision to leave their workplace, when their decision to leave may be due to feelings and perceptions about their CS and chance to get ahead in their organization. First, few studies document the link between CA and career adaptation outcomes (Tolentino et al., 2013), or the mediating effects of promotability and CS on TI. Thus, the influence of CS and promotability on the association between CA and turnover remains unclear. Second, although Chan and Mai (2015) suggest that CS is negatively related to TI, and CS mediated the association between CA and TI, their findings based on low-ranking employees might not apply to the wider pool of employees filling different ranks in the organization. Thus, there is still a need to further corroborate the previous finding.