Organisational Mobility and Career Development
| Pages | 11-17 |
| Date | 01 March 1982 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb055459 |
| Published date | 01 March 1982 |
| Author | C.W. Routledge,C.K. Elliot |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Organisational Mobility and
Career Development
by C. W. Routledge
Department of Management Studies, Loughborough University
and C. K. Elliot
Huddersfield Polytechnic
Introduction
A major function of personnel management is to help in-
dividuals and organisations cope with change. Managerial
career development provides a practical example of this
concern as effective action requires an understanding of
how individuals and organisations initiate and are affected
by change. These changes can also be considered from the
more theoretical viewpoints of organisational mobility.
The practical concerns of the personnel manager and the
theoretical models of the student of organisational mobili-
ty should both benefit from the two-way flow of insights,
and some of these potential links are explored in this arti-
cle.
The literature of organisational mobility is fragmented
and characterised by a variety of perspectives, and so a
coherent framework is needed to draw together many of
these disparate
views.
The ideas of Milkovich, Greenhalgh
and Anderson[1] appear to have potential for structuring
some of the recurrent theories in research on the process of
organisational mobility and to suggest some implications
for career development policies and practices. Milkovich et
al. argue that the organisational mobility process has two
components: structure and flow. On the one hand, mobili-
ty is an observable structural phenomenon, which can be
studied apart from the idiosyncratic work experience of in-
dividuals in that it relates to a relatively standardised and
related set of roles to be performed. On the other hand, it
is concerned with the flow of individuals through these
roles.
These two aspects are highly interdependent. The
structure of an organisational mobility path is identified
and takes on meaning in terms of movement through the
organisation. In turn, the flows of individuals are pattern-
ed and regulated in terms of the structural properties. The
dual concept is analogous to a script and stage setting for a
play (structural aspect) and the play being interpreted and
acted out by the cast of players (flow aspect).
This dependence and interrelatedness of the two aspects
of the process suggest that, in fact, the process may be con-
sidered as having three components: structure, flow, and
their interaction which generates the resulting mobility pat-
tern. This idea is strengthened when it is considered that
future structures will be determined as a result of outcomes
of values, beliefs and attitudes of employees. So, over
time,
the three components appear dependent and inter-
related.
Five aspects of the mobility process will be considered.
Two aspects can be identified from a structural perspec-
tive:
(1) The nature of organisational positions and their
relationships, and
(2) The effect of the organisational environment and
contextual variables on the mobility process.
A flow perspective suggests the importance of:
(3) Individual differences as determinants of flow.
Two aspects can be identified from an interaction
perspective:
(4) Mobility patterns, and
(5) The nature of change associated with the mobility
process.
The Nature of Organisational Positions and their
Relationships
Many writers, in describing career patterns or the organisa-
tional mobility process, have viewed the organisational en-
vironment as a series of discrete positions related in work
content and differentiated vertically and horizontally. This
idea was first used by Sorokin[2] and developed by
Caplow[3] in his model of social mobility. Caplow iden-
tified nine components of social mobility, but it is the con-
cept of vertical and horizontal movement which has been
used most frequently in the organisational context.
For example, Walker[4] stressed the importance and
complementary nature of vertical and lateral position
moves. Idema[5] described career development as essen-
tially vertical and lateral movement between a number of
job positions. Wellbank, Hall, Morgan and Hammer[6]
described career paths (the result of mobility) as a series of
vertical and lateral moves between job positions.
A further dimension was added by Schein[7] when he
envisaged the organisation as a three dimensional cone.
Movement within the cone can take place in three concep-
tually distinguishable dimensions; vertical (increasing or
decreasing responsibility), circumferential (changing one's
division, department or function) and radially (increasing
or decreasing one's centrality or insider status).
This idea of the dimensions of mobility lacks precision
when examined in the light of real organisations. Several
different situations could be identified as vertical moves: a
promotion within the same department and function; a
promotion to a different department, but within the same
function; a promotion to a different department with a
dif-
ferent function; or even promotion to a different organisa-
tion. The possible situations are numerous. Similarly, a
horizontal move could be considered as a move to a job in
the same function dealing with a different product, or it
could entail a change of function, or organisation or
geographical location. Again, there are numerous different
situations that could be classified as horizontal moves.
Therefore, to describe a positional move in terms of
two
or
three dimensions gives only a very vague idea of what it en-
tails.
It is true that all moves can be seen as having these
components, but more detail is required to make the
description meaningful in an organisational context. A
Organisational
Mobility | 11
To continue reading
Request your trial