This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Vocational Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jvb

Job search and social cognitive theory: The role of career-relevant activities
Jelena Zikic a,*, Alan M. Saks b
a
School of Administrative Studies, Department of Human Resources, Atkinson Faculty of Liberal and Professional Studies, York University,
4700 Keele St., Toronto Ont., Canada M3J 1P3
b
Centre for Industrial Relations and Human Resources, University of Toronto, 121 St. George Street, Toronto, Ont., Canada M5S 2E8

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Social cognitive theory was used to explain the relationships between career-relevant
Received 11 June 2008 activities (environmental and self career exploration, career resources, and training),
Available online 13 November 2008 self-regulatory variables (job search self-efficacy and job search clarity), variables from
the Theory of Planned Behavior (job search attitude, subjective norm, job search intention),
and job search intensity. Based on a sample of employed and unemployed job seekers, we
Keywords: found that job seekers who spent more time in career exploration, attended more training
Job search
programs, and used more career resources reported higher job search clarity and job search
Career
Self-regulation
self-efficacy. Job search self-efficacy, job search attitude, and subjective norm predicted job
Theory of planned behavior search intention, and job search clarity and job search intention predicted job search inten-
Social cognitive theory sity eight months later. The results of this study provide practical information on what job
seekers can do to improve their job search clarity and job search self-efficacy and demon-
strate the application of social cognitive theory for understanding and predicting job search
behavior.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Job search has received a considerable amount of research attention in the last decade. Much of this research has inves-
tigated job search models in which individual differences and situational variables predict job search behaviors and out-
comes (Kanfer, Wanberg, & Kantrowitz, 2001; Wanberg, Watt, & Rumsey, 1996). Two theories that have been the focus of
job search research are self-regulation theory (SR) (Kanfer et al., 2001) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) (Van Hooft,
Born, Taris, & Van Der Flier, 2004b; Van Hooft, Born, Taris, Van Der Flier, & Blonk, 2004a). Although variables from both the-
ories have been found to predict job search behavior, there has been little attempt to combine them in one model. One of the
purposes of this study was to integrate variables from both theories using social cognitive theory as a framework.
A second and related purpose of this study is to investigate career-relevant activities that can influence two key mech-
anisms of job search self-regulation. Although job search research has the potential to inform job seekers and career coun-
selors on how to improve search success, few studies have focused on the practical aspect of what job seekers can do to
improve their job search. For example, we know that job search self-efficacy is an important predictor of job search behavior,
however, research has not examined how job seekers can strengthen their job search self-efficacy other than through job
search training or instruction (Van Hooft et al., 2004b). Furthermore, many models of job search begin with individual dif-
ference variables such as self-efficacy and tend not to consider the factors that precede and influence them.
The present study focuses on career-relevant activities that job seekers can employ to improve their job search self-effi-
cacy and job search clarity. Job search self-efficacy and job search clarity are important because of their role in the self-reg-

* Corresponding author. Fax: +1 416 736 5963.

E-mail addresses: jelenaz@yorku.ca (J. Zikic), saks@utsc.utoronto.ca (A.M. Saks).

0001-8791/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2008.11.001
 Author's personal copy

118 J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127

ulation process and because they predict job search intensity (Côté, Saks, & Zikic, 2006; Kanfer et al., 2001). The present
study also includes variables from the theory of planned behavior (TPB) because they have also been found to be important
predictors of job search intensity. As described in the next section, we use social cognitive theory as a framework to integrate
and explain the relationships between the variables in the present study.

1.1. Social cognitive theory and job search

Social cognitive theory explains human psychosocial functioning in terms of the interaction between behavior, cognitive
and other personal factors, and environmental events. These three factors interact as determinants of each other in a process
known as triadic reciprocal causation (Bandura, 1986). In addition, social cognitive theory encompasses a number of self-reg-
ulatory and self-reflective processes such as self-efficacy and goals. In recent years, social cognitive career theory (SCCT) has
been used to understand career development processes (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). According to Lent et al. (1994), SCCT
describes how people’s environments expose them to career-relevant activities that influence the development of self-effi-
cacy, outcome expectations, interests, and goals which influence career choices and behaviors.
Social cognitive theory provides a useful theoretical basis to understand the relationships between the variables in the
present study as both self-efficacy and goals can be influenced by career-relevant activities. In the present study, we main-
tain that career-relevant activities function as environmental factors that can influence job seekers’ job search self-efficacy
and job search clarity. In addition, the variables from the TPB can also be understood within a social cognitive theory frame-
work as they represent environmental (subjective norm), cognitive and personal (job search attitude, job search self-effi-
cacy), goal-related (job search intention), and behavioral variables (job search intensity) that are all related to each other.
Fig. 1 provides an overview of our social cognitive theory model of job search behavior. Career-relevant activities are
shown to be positively related to job search self-efficacy and job search clarity; job search self-efficacy, job search attitude,
and subjective norm are positively related to job search intention; and job search clarity and job search intention are pos-
itively related to job search intensity. Although our model suggests that these relationships are of a causal nature, it is impor-
tant to recognize that our methodology does not allow us to make causal conclusions about the relationships shown in the
model.

1.2. Job search self-efficacy and job search clarity

Kanfer et al. (2001) conceptualized job search behavior as the product of a self-regulatory process ‘‘that begins with the
identification and commitment to pursuing an employment goal” that ‘‘activates search behavior designed to bring about the
goal” (pp. 838). They identified trait and contextual variables that affect self-regulatory mechanisms and the direction and
intensity of job search behavior. As described earlier, two mechanisms that are central to the self-regulatory process are self-
efficacy and goals (Bandura, 1991). In the job search literature, these variables have been conceptualized as job search self-
efficacy and job search clarity.

1.2.1. Job search self-efficacy

Self-efficacy is a major mechanism of the self-regulatory process of social cognitive theory and plays a central role in the
exercise of personal agency. Within social cognitive theory, self-efficacy is the most proximal regulator of human behavior
and a strong predictor of thought, affect, motivation, and action (Bandura, 1991). Self-efficacy beliefs influence the courses of
action people choose to pursue, the amount of effort one exerts in the pursuit of goals, and how long one will persevere in the
face of difficulties and setbacks (Bandura, 1991).
Job search self-efficacy is the belief that one can successfully perform specific job search behaviors and obtain employ-
ment (Saks & Ashforth, 1999). In their meta-analysis, Kanfer et al. (2001) obtained an effect size of .27 between self-efficacy

Career
Exploration
Job search Job search
clarity intensity

Career
Resources
Job search self- Job search
efficacy intention

Training
Job search
attitude

Subjective norm

Fig. 1. Social cognitive theory model of job search behavior.

 Author's personal copy

J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127 119

and job search behavior. Job search self-efficacy has also been found to be related to job search outcomes such as search sta-
tus, duration, and the number offers received (Kanfer et al., 2001).

1.2.2. Job search clarity

Goals are also a major component of social cognitive theory as they guide and motivate behavior (Bandura, 1991).
Although employment goals are central to the self-regulation process and believed to activate job search behavior (Kanfer
et al., 2001), few studies have actually measured employment goals. However, a recent development in the job search liter-
ature is the concept of job search clarity which represents a goal mechanism.
Wanberg, Hough, and Song (2002) defined job search clarity as the extent to which job seekers have clear job search
objectives and a clear idea of the type of career, work, or job desired. Job seekers who lack job search clarity may spend more
time exploring different options and contemplating the future, thus reducing the intensity of their job search (Wanberg et al.,
2002). On the other hand, high job search clarity might better direct job seekers’ attention and effort towards more targeted
activities pertaining to job search resulting in greater job search intensity. Côté et al. (2006) found that job search clarity was
positively related to job search intensity.

1.2.3. Summary
Although both job search self-efficacy and job search clarity are important mechanisms of the self-regulatory process and
have been found to predict job search intensity, there has been little attempt to identify and examine how job seekers can
improve their job search self-efficacy and job search clarity. Previous studies have tested models in which individual differ-
ences predict job search self-efficacy and job search clarity. For example, Brown, Cober, Kane, Levy, and Shalhoop (2006)
tested a model in which dispositional variables predict job search self-efficacy which in turn predicts job search behaviors.
Similarly, Côté et al. (2006) tested a model in which individual difference variables predict job search clarity which then pre-
dicts job search intensity. Neither study nor any other previous study has investigated what job seekers can do to improve
their job search self-efficacy and job search clarity.
However, within a social cognitive theory framework, environmental events can also influence people’s cognitive and
personal states. In particular, by participating in environmental events and activities, job seekers can obtain information, re-
sources, instruction, and feedback that can lead to improvements in their job search self-efficacy and job search clarity. As
described in the next section, the present study focuses on career-relevant activities that have implications for job search
self-efficacy and job search clarity.

1.3. Career-relevant activities

In searching for employment, individuals are active agents who can use a wide repertoire of behaviors for adapting to and
handling their current situation. This adaptation is characterized by reflection, the exploration of various career options, and
by actively engaging in developmental activities. By increasing emphasis on boundaryless careers and career self-manage-
ment, job seekers are expected to act as free agents who must actively seek out training and developmental activities that
will increase their employability and help them to more successfully compete in the labor market (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996;
King, 2004). Given that the world of work rapidly changes and that employment contracts are unstable (Arthur & Rousseau,
1996), the need to reflect upon one’s career options and oneself and act accordingly is ongoing.
Based on career and job search theories, we propose four types of career-relevant activities that job seekers can engage in
prior to their job search that can lead to improvements in their job search self-efficacy and job search clarity: environmental
and self career exploration, career resources, and training. These four activities are often suggested as strategies for job seek-
ers to use to improve their job opportunities and prospects (Saks, 2005; Wanberg et al., 2002; Werbel, 2000; Zikic & Klehe,
2006).
Career exploration. Career exploration is defined as the gathering of information relevant to the progress of one’s career
(Blustein, 1997; Jordaan, 1963; Stumpf, Colarelli, & Hartman, 1983). It is considered to be a lifelong process that is triggered
particularly during transitions as it allows individuals to cope (Blustein, 1997; Savickas, 1997). It has also been suggested
that career exploration is an important initial step that prepares job seekers for a successful job search and should be in-
cluded in theories of job search (Werbel, 2000).
Environmental exploration is an individual’s investigation of various career options by proactively collecting information
on jobs, organizations, occupations or industries that allow more informed career decisions. Self exploration focuses on
exploring one’s own interests, values, and experiences in order to reflect on one’s career and to gain a deeper understanding
of oneself. Engaging in these forms of exploration may facilitate a clearer understanding of individual career ambitions as
well as opportunities including hoped for work contexts as well as specific work activities (Zikic & Klehe, 2006).
According to Wanberg et al. (2002), individuals who do not have clear job search objectives might need to spend more
time in career exploration due to a lack of self-understanding and a lack of information about the work world and job oppor-
tunities. Thus, career exploration should help individuals obtain greater clarity of the type of work, job, or career they desire.
In addition, by exploring various work options and better understanding one’s own capabilities, job seekers may also obtain
increased confidence in their ability to search for and find the right job for them. For example, in a study on career explo-
ration and interview performance and outcomes, Stumpf, Austin, and Hartman (1984) found that both environmental and
self career exploration were positively related to interview self-efficacy. More recently, Zikic and Klehe (2006) found a
 Author's personal copy

120 J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127

positive relationship between self-efficacy and career exploration dimensions of unemployed workers. We therefore tested
the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1. Environmental career exploration is positively related to (a) job search clarity and (b) job search self-efficacy.

Hypothesis 2. Self career exploration is positively related to (a) job search clarity and (b) job search self-efficacy.
Career resources. As active agents, job seekers can choose to use various resources at their disposal prior to their job search
which can help them to learn more about how to look for a job as well as the type of job opportunities available across occu-
pations. These are resources that a job seeker might consult before they actually begin to look for a specific job and contact
employers. Some common resources include career centers, career fairs, job search clubs, guidance counselors, as well as
government and industry websites.
The use of career resources can provide job seekers with a broader pool of information about occupations and jobs which
should help them develop clearer objectives and goals and hence greater job search clarity. In addition, some career re-
sources such as job clubs and guidance counselors typically instruct job seekers on how to search for employment and in
the process improve job search self-efficacy. Therefore, we tested the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3. Career resources are positively related to (a) job search clarity and (b) job search self-efficacy.
Training. Training programs can also improve job seekers’ job search clarity and job search self-efficacy. Individuals can
obtain training on their own or from their employer and it can be formal or on-the-job. By attending various types of training
programs, job seekers can upgrade existing skills and acquire new ones. As a result, they not only improve their skills and
qualifications for various jobs, but they also increase their employability (Fugate, Kinicki, & Ashforth, 2004). The acquisition
of new skills should enable job seekers to better understand the type of career and work they are qualified for and the jobs
they might pursue. Thus, we expect job seekers who attend more training programs to have higher job search clarity.
Moreover, training increases a job seeker’s human capital through the acquisition of new skills and it also enhances an
individual’s likelihood of gaining employment and eventual job search success (Fugate et al., 2004; Wanberg et al., 2002).
As a result, job seekers should be more confident in their ability to find a job given their newly acquired skills, greater human
capital, and enhanced marketability. In addition, research has found that training programs directly increase self-efficacy
(Mathieu, Martineau, & Tannenbaum, 1993). Thus, job seekers’ with more training should be more confident of their ability
to find a job given their new skills and confidence in using them. Therefore, we tested the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4. Training is positively related to (a) job search clarity and (b) job search self-efficacy.

1.4. The theory of planned behavior and job search

As indicated earlier, job search self-efficacy and job search clarity are key mechanisms of self-regulation theory that pre-
dict job search intensity. In addition, a number of studies have recently applied the theory of planned behavior to job search
and found it to be a useful theory to explain the job search behavior of employed and unemployed job seekers (Van Hooft
et al., 2004b). According to the TPB, an individual’s intention to engage in a behavior is the main predictor of the behavior in
question, and one’s intention to engage in a specific behavior is a function of one’s attitude toward the behavior (belief that
the behavior leads to certain outcomes), subjective norm (perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behav-
ior), and perceived behavioral control which is similar to perceived self-efficacy (Ajzen, 1991).
When applied to job search, job search intention is believed to be the most immediate predictor of job search behavior,
and job search intentions are predicted by job search attitude, subjective norm, and job search self-efficacy (Song, Wanberg,
Niu, & Xie, 2006; Van Hooft, Born, Taris, & Van Der Flier, 2005; Van Hooft et al., 2004a, 2004b; Wanberg, Glomb, Song, &
Sorenson, 2005). In the context of social cognitive theory, the variables from the TPB that predict job search intention can
be considered cognitive and personal factors (job search self-efficacy, job search attitude) and environmental factors (sub-
jective norm). Thus, the TPB can be integrated into a social cognitive theory model of job search in which environmental
(subjective norm) and personal and cognitive factors (job search self-efficacy and job search attitude) predict job search
intention as follows:
Hypothesis 5a. Job search self-efficacy is positively related to job search intention.

Hypothesis 5b. Job search attitude is positively related to job search intention.

Hypothesis 5c. Subjective norm is positively related to job search intention.

The TPB argues that the best predictor of behavior is the intention to perform the behavior. Similarly, SCCT suggests that
goals and intentions predict activity involvement and behaviors (Lent et al., 1994). According to Bandura (1986), ‘‘intention
plays a prominent role in the self-regulation of behavior. An intention is defined as the determination to perform certain
activities or to bring about a certain future state of affairs” (pp. 467). SCCT conceptualizes career/academic choice goals
as the intention to engage in a particular action or series of actions (Lent et al., 1994). In a similar vein, job search intention
can be conceptualized as job search goals to engage in specific job search behaviors.
 Author's personal copy

J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127 121

As indicated earlier, Kanfer et al. (2001) argued that employment goals activate job search behavior to bring about
the goal. Thus, when applied to job search, job search intention should predict job search intensity and mediate the rela-
tionship between job search attitude, subjective norm, and job search self-efficacy on job search intensity (Van Hooft
et al., 2004a, 2004b). Research on job search and the TPB has generally found that job search intention is a significant
predictor of job search intensity, and in some cases mediates the relationship between the other variables in the model
(i.e., job search attitude, subjective norm, and job search self-efficacy) and job search intensity (Song et al., 2006; Van
Hooft et al., 2004a, 2004b, 2005; Vinokur & Caplan, 1987; Wanberg et al., 2005). Therefore, we tested the following
hypotheses:
Hypothesis 6. Job search intention is positively related to job search intensity.

Hypothesis 7. Job search intention will mediate the relationships between job search self-efficacy, job search attitude, and
subjective norm with job search intensity.
Finally, Wanberg et al. (2002) argued that job search clarity can influence job search intensity by directing a person’s
attention and effort towards activities pertaining to their job search. To date, one study has found that job search clarity
was positively related to job search intensity (Côté et al., 2006). Therefore, our final hypothesis is the following:
Hypothesis 8. Job search clarity is positively related to job search intensity.

2. Methods

2.1. Sample and procedure

We administered two surveys to collect data on the study variables. Data were collected for Time 1 in the spring 2006 and
8 months later (Time 2) in early 2007 using a self-report web questionnaire. After obtaining institutional approval from Hu-
man Resources Development of Canada (HRDC), the survey was administered online using a link from HRDC’s job search/
career web site. The HRDC is a well recognized Government sponsored site that many Canadians visit during their job search.
This site is visited by both employed and unemployed job seekers and offers job search and career assistance/resources, and
job postings offered for free to the general public.
The Time 1 survey measured the career-relevant activities (self and environment career exploration, career resources, and
training), job search self-efficacy and job search clarity, and the TPB variables (job search attitude, subjective norm, intention
to search). The Time 2 survey measured job search intensity.
At Time 1, 795 respondents filled out the survey. Given the nature of the web survey method, a lower response rate was
obtained at Time 2 (20%, 162 participants) (Cook, Heath, & Thompson, 2000). Therefore, we compared the participants who
completed the Time 2 survey with non-respondents and found that there were no differences on the majority of study vari-
ables except for the following: age, X2 (9, 794) = 60.007, p = .001; education, X2 (9, 795) = 38.998, p = .001; and job search
self-efficacy, t (484) = 2.077, p = .05. The non-respondents were somewhat younger and less educated and they also had
somewhat higher job search self-efficacy.
Of 795 participants at Time 1, 70% were women and 34% of the sample had a high school diploma or less while the rest of
the sample had either college or technical training (66%), and 30% had a university degree or higher. The majority of the sam-
ple (73%) was between 25 and 40 years of age. Close to one third of the sample (28%) reported having studied or currently
enrolled in the field of business, commerce, management or education; 10% were in humanities; and 20% reported social sci-
ences and services. The rest of the sample was evenly distributed between medicine, arts, law, hospitality, education, engi-
neering with about 5–7% in each category. The sample consisted of similar numbers of employed (39%) and unemployed
(42%) job seekers. Finally, the majority of respondents (80%) were born in Canada and 70% spoke English as their first
language, 20% French and 10% other languages. These sample characteristics correspond closely to a typical job seeker profile
likely to access the HRDC web site in Canada (HRDC report, 2005). A small percentage of respondents were not searching for
a job (e.g., students) and were therefore dropped from the study. The final sample included 359 unemployed and 333
employed job seekers.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Career exploration

We used Stumpf et al.’s (1983) measure of career exploration which assesses self career exploration (four items; e.g.,
‘‘Have been retrospective in thinking about my career”) and environmental career exploration (six items; e.g., ‘‘Sought more
information on specific career options of interest to me”). These scales have been validated and found to be reliable and useful
predictors of job search outcomes (Stumpf & Hartman, 1984; Stumpf et al., 1984; Werbel, 2000). Participants responded
using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (a little) to 5 (a great deal). The reliabilities were high for both scales and
similar to other studies (Stumpf et al., 1983; Werbel, 2000; Zikic & Klehe, 2006) (environmental career exploration,
a = .85; self career exploration, a = .86).
 Author's personal copy

122 J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127

2.2.2. Career resources

The career resources scale was designed for this study. The items were based on resources that are often described in the
job search literature (e.g., job search clubs, career fairs, guidance counselors, career centers) as well as resources that were of
interest to Human Resources Development of Canada (e.g., government internet sites, occupation specific-sites). Participants
were asked to indicate the extent that they used 12 career resources in the last two months. Sample items include ‘‘Job search
clubs” and ‘‘Government internet sites”. They indicated their use of each resource using a 5-point scale with anchors (1) Never,
0 times to (5) Very frequently at least 10 times (a = .84).

2.2.3. Training
A seven item training scale was developed for this study. The items were written to capture the various ways in which
employed and unemployed job seekers can obtain training (e.g., formal, informal, employer-provided, and self-supported).
Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they engaged in each type of training in the last 2 months. They re-
sponded using a 5-point scale with anchors (1) Not at all to (5) A great deal. Sample items include ‘‘Self-supported formal
training” and ‘‘Employer provided formal training”, (a = .82).

2.2.4. Job search self-efficacy

Job search self-efficacy was measured by a 10-item scale based on items used in previous studies (Caplan, Vinokur, Price,
& van Ryn, 1989; Saks & Ashforth,1999, 2000). Similar scales have been used in other studies and found to predict job search
behaviors and outcomes (Côté et al., 2006; Saks, 2006; Saks & Ashforth, 1999, 2000). Since the focus of this study was job
search behavior, the 10-items used for this study focus on specific job search behaviors (e.g., Prepare a sales pitch that will
attract the interest of employers) rather than job search outcomes. Participants were asked to indicate how confident they
are about successfully doing each of the job search behaviors using a 5-point scale with anchors, 1 = not at all confident,
to 5 = totally confident (a = .89).

2.2.5. Job search clarity

Job search clarity was measured by a 5-item scale based on Wanberg et al. (2002). However, some of the Wanberg et al.
(2002) scale items could not be used because they were designed for laid off workers and refer to making a career change.
We therefore developed the following three additional items based on Wanberg et al.’s (2002) definition of job search clarity
(having clear job search objectives and a clear idea of the type of career, work, or job desired): ‘‘I have a clear idea of where I
want to work”, ‘‘I do not have very clear job search objectives” (reverse scored) and ‘‘I have a clear idea of the type of company I
want to work for”. Participants responded to each item using a 5-point scale with anchors, (1) Strongly disagree, to (5)
Strongly agree, (a = .84).

2.2.6. Job search attitude

According to the TPB, attitudes are a function of one’s beliefs that the behavior will lead to certain outcomes or benefits
and their evaluations of them (Van Hooft et al., 2004a, 2004b). We therefore generated a list of job attributes measured in
previous studies on job search and job choice (e.g., higher income, job security, opportunities for advancement, benefits, etc.)
(Cable & Judge, 1996; Prussia, Fugate, & Kinicki, 2001; Schwab, Rynes, & Aldag, 1987). This resulted in a 12-item scale that
consisted of various benefits and outcomes associated with job search. Sample items include ‘‘Get a higher income” and ‘‘Bet-
ter job security”. Participants were asked to indicate the importance of each benefit to them in their decision to look for a new
job on a 5-point scale with anchors (1) Not at all important, to (5) Very important (a = .82).

2.2.7. Subjective norm

We used Vinokur and Caplan’s (1987) 2-item scale that asks participants to indicate the extent to which their significant
other and other people who are important to them think they should seek a new job in the next four months to measure
subjective norm. The scale has been shown to predict job search intention in previous studies (Van Hooft et al., 2004a,
2004b, 2005). Participants responded using a 5-point Likert scale from (1) Not at all to (5) A great deal (a = .83).

2.2.8. Job search intention

Job search intention was measured by a 10-item scale based on Blau’s (1994) job search behavior scale. Blau (1994) pro-
vided validation evidence of his measure which has been used by other researchers to measure job search intensity and job
search intentions (Côté et al., 2006; Saks & Ashforth, 1999, 2000; Van Hooft et al., 2004a, 2004b, 2005; Wanberg, Kanfer, &
Banas, 2000; Wanberg, Kanfer, & Rotundo, 1999; Wanberg et al., 2002). Participants were asked to indicate the extent to
which they plan to do each of the behaviors in the next 2 months (from 1 = never [0 times] to 5 = very often [at least 10 times]).
Sample items include ‘‘Send out copies of my resume to potential employees” and ‘‘List myself as a job applicant in a newspaper,
journal, or professional association” (a = .87).

2.2.9. Job search intensity

In order to ensure correspondence between the measurement of job search intention and job search behavior (Van Hooft
et al., 2004a, 2004b), job search intensity was measured by the same 10-items from Blau (1994) that were used to measure
 Author's personal copy

J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127 123

job search intention. Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they did each of the behaviors in the last two
months (from 1 = never [0 times] to 5 = very often [at least 10 times]) (a = .86).

2.2.10. Control variables

We controlled for a number of demographic and background variables which have been found to be related to job search
intensity including gender, age, and education (Kanfer et al., 2001). In addition, because the sample included employed and
unemployed job seekers, we also controlled for employment status (Van Hooft et al., 2005).

3. Results

Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of the study variables. As predicted, the career-rel-
evant activities were positively related to job search self-efficacy and job search clarity. The three variables from the TPB (i.e.,
job search self-efficacy, job search attitude, subjective norm) were positively related to job search intention, and job search
clarity and job search intention were positively related to job search intensity.
To test the study hypotheses, we conducted four hierarchical multiple regressions for the prediction of job search self-
efficacy, job search clarity, job search intention, and job search intensity. We adjusted the significance level to p < .01 to min-
imize the probability of a Type I error.

3.1. Career-relevant activities predicting job search self-efficacy and job search clarity

To test the hypotheses for the relationships between the career-relevant activities and job search self-efficacy and job
search clarity (Hypotheses 1–4), job search self-efficacy and job search clarity were regressed on the four career-relevant
activities.
As shown in Table 2, after entering the control variables in step 1, the career-relevant activities explained a significant
amount of incremental variance in job search self-efficacy (DR2 = .24, p < .01). The regression coefficients were significant
for environmental career exploration (b = .22, p < .01), self career exploration (b = .16, p < .01), career resources (b = .18,
p < .01), and training (b = .12, p < .01). These results provide support for Hypotheses 1–4a.
The career-relevant activities also explained significant incremental variance in job search clarity (DR2 = .24, p < .01). The
regression coefficients were significant for environmental career exploration (b = .32, p < .01), career resources (b = .17,
p < .01), and training (b = .12, p < .01) but not for self career exploration. These results provide support for Hypotheses 1b
3b and 4b but not 2b.

3.2. Predicting job search intention and job search intensity

To test the hypotheses for the prediction of job search intention (Hypothesis 5a–c), job search intention was regressed on
job search self-efficacy, job search attitude, and subjective norm in accordance with the TPB. To provide a rigorous test of the

Table 1
Means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of study variables.

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
a
1 Gender 1.30 .46
2 Ageb 3.93 2.30 .10**
3 Educationc 5.34 3.21 .09* .26**
4 Employment statusd .48 .50 .07* .11** .08*
5 Environmental career 2.82 1.01 .04 .05 .06 .09*
exploration
6 Self career exploration 3.68 .95 .03 .10* .01 .06 .51**
7 Career resources 2.42 .80 .04 .02 .01 .14** .53** .22**
8 Training 2.83 1.04 .00 .04 .07 .06 .27** .20** .33**
9 Job search clarity 3.44 1.04 .05 .06 .09 .00 .42** .21** .38** .28**
10 Job search self efficacy 3.31 .86 .01 .03 .02 .04 .42** .34** .38** .28** .44**
11 Job search attitude 3.74 .76 .03 .08 .14** .04 .23** .20** .26** .16** .13** .17**
12 Subjective norm 3.97 1.30 .07 .03 .04 .25** .19** .14** .27** .03 .08 .17** .21**
13 Job search intention 3.16 .97 .02 .07 .04 .24** .39** .33** .50** .27** .21** .43** .28** .41**
14 Job search intensity 2.44 .88 .11 .18* .01 .31** .25** .14 .35** .10 .34** .25** .26** .22* .47**

Note. Due to missing values, N ranges from 415 to 690 at Time 1, 118–128 at Time 2.
a
1, female; 2, male.
b
1, 15–29; 2, 20–25; 3, 26–29; 4, 30–35; 5, 36–39.
c
1, some high school or less; 2, high school or equivalent; 3, some post secondary education; 4, high school diploma plus some technical training; 5,
apprenticeship; 6, journey certified; 7, college diploma; 8, some university; 9, graduated from university.
d
0, unemployed; 1, employed.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
 Author's personal copy

124 J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127

Table 2
Hierarchical regression of job search self-efficacy and job search clarity.

Predictor Job search self-efficacy Job search clarity

Step 1 Step 2 Step 1 Step 2
Control variables
Gendera .01 .01 .01 .01
Ageb .05 .03 .07 .10*
Educationc .02 .01 .08 .06
Employment statusd .07 .02 .01 .04
Career activities
Environment career exploration .22** .32**
Self career exploration .16** .00
Career resources .18** .17**
Training .12** .12**
R2 .01 .25** .01 .25**
Adjusted R2 .00 .23** .01 .24**
DR2 .01 .24** .01 .24**

Note. N, 421 for job search self-efficacy; N, 423 for job search clarity.
a
1, female; 2, male.
b
1, 15–29; 2, 20–25; 3, 26–29; 4, 30–35; 5, 36–39.
c
1, some high school or less; 2, high school or equivalent; 3, some post secondary education; 4, high school diploma plus some technical training; 5,
apprenticeship; 6, journey certified; 7, college diploma; 8, some university; 9, graduated from university.
d
0 = unemployed, 1 = employed.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

hypotheses, the control variables were entered in step 1 and the career-relevant activities were entered in step 2 of the
regressions.
As shown in Table 3, the control variables explained a significant amount of the variance in job search intention (R2 = .05,
p < .01) as did the career-relevant activities (DR2 = .26, p < .01), and the TPB variables (DR2 = .12, p < .01). The regression coef-
ficients were significant for job search attitude (b = .11, p < .01), subjective norm (b = .23, p < .01), and job search self-efficacy
(b = .24, p < .01). In addition, one of the control variables was significant (employment status, b = .12, p < .01) as were two of

Table 3
Hierarchical regression of job search intention and job search intensity.

Predictor Job search intention Job search intensity

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Control variables
Gendera .02 .04 .04 .04 .03 .01 .05
Ageb .02 .03 .05 .10 .13 .13 .05
Educationc .03 .04 .03 .05 .05 .06 .01
Employment statusd .23** .17** .12** .26** .21* .20* .19*
Career activities
Environment career exploration .11* .04 .16 .10 .06
Self career exploration .17** .10* .02 .06 .04
Career resources .33** .22** .22* .17 .00
Training .09* .07 .04 .07 .08
TPB and SR variables
Job search attitude .11** .17 .13
Subjective norm .23** .04 .04
Job search self-efficacy .24** .17 .01
Job search intention .24**
Job search clarity .29**
R2 .05** .32** .43** .10* .20** .25** .32**
Adjusted R2 .04** .30** .42** .07* .14** .17** .24**
DR2 .05** .26** .12** .10* .10** .05 .08**

Note. N, 402 for job search intention; N, 117 for job search intensity.
a
1 = female, 2 = male.
b
1 = 15–29, 2 = 20–25, 3 = 26–29, 4 = 30–35, 5 = 36–39.
c
1, some high school or less; 2, high school or equivalent; 3, some post secondary education; 4, high school diploma plus some technical training; 5,
apprenticeship; 6, journey certified; 7, college diploma; 8, some university; 9, graduated from university.
d
0, unemployed; 1, employed.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
 Author's personal copy

J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127 125

the career activities (self career exploration, b = .10, p < .05; career resources, b = .22, p < .01). These results provide support
for Hypothesis 5a–c.
To test the hypotheses for the prediction job search intensity (Hypothesis 6–8), job search intensity was regressed on job
search intention and job search clarity. To provide a rigorous test of the hypotheses, the control variables were entered in
step 1, the career-relevant activities were entered in step 2, the predictors of search intention were entered in step 3, and
job search clarity and job search intention were entered in step 4.
As shown in Table 3, the control variables did not explain a significant amount of the variance in job search intensity
(R2 = .10, p < .05). The career-relevant activities explained significant variance (DR2 = .10, p < .01) but the TPB variables did
not (DR2 = .05, p < .10). In the last step, job search intention and job search clarity explained a significant amount of incre-
mental variance (DR2 = .08, p < .01). In the final model, the only significant predictors were job search intention (b = .24,
p < .05) and job search clarity (b = .29, p < .01). The regression coefficient was also significant for one of the control variables
(employment status, b = .19, p < .05).
Finally, there was no support for the TPB mediation hypothesis (Hypothesis 7) as job search attitude, subjective norm, and
job search self-efficacy were not significantly related to job search intensity in step 3 of the regression (p < .10).

4. Discussion

Although research on job search has shown a dramatic increase in recent years, the emphasis has been on models and
theory development rather than practice. The present study focused on both practical and theoretical issues of job search.
We investigated four career-relevant activities that job seekers can engage in prior to their job search that can improve
two key mechanisms of job search self-regulation. In addition, we included variables from two current theoretical ap-
proaches to job search behavior and used social cognitive theory to integrate them and explain the relationships between
the study variables. The results of this study extend job search research and practice in several important ways.
First, we found that the career-relevant activities were positively related to job search self-efficacy and job search clarity.
Job seekers who spent more time in both environmental and self career exploration, used more career resources, and at-
tended more training programs reported higher job search self-efficacy. Similarly, job seekers who spent more time in envi-
ronmental career exploration, used more career resources, and attended more training programs reported higher job search
clarity. These findings represent an important extension of job search research which has often neglected to study factors
that influence the determinants of job search behavior. Our results indicate that there are activities that job seekers can en-
gage in to increase their job search self-efficacy and job search clarity and compliments research that has linked personality
to job search self-efficacy and job search clarity (Brown et al., 2006; Côté et al., 2006).
Second, the results of this study are consistent with research on job search and the theory of planned behavior. In par-
ticular, we found that job search self-efficacy, job search attitude, and subjective norm were positively related to job search
intention, and job search intention predicted job search intensity. However, our results extend research on job search and the
TPB in several ways. With respect to the prediction of job search intention, we found that self and environmental career
exploration and career resources predicted job search intention, and self career exploration and career resources remained
significant predictors of search intention even with the TPB variables included in the model. These findings suggest addi-
tional predictors of job search intention beyond those associated with the TPB. In particular, job seekers who spend more
time in career exploration and use more career resources have greater intentions to search.
With respect to job search intensity, we found that job search clarity, an important self-regulatory variable associated
with employment goals, was a significant predictor of job search intensity along with job search intention. Thus, while pre-
vious research has found that job search intention and job search clarity predict job search intensity independently (Côté
et al., 2006; Van Hooft et al.,2004a, 2004b), this is the first study to include them both in the prediction of job search intensity
and represents an important extension of research on job search and the TPB which has focused primarily on job search
intention as the main determinant of job search intensity. It also demonstrates the importance of variables from both SR the-
ory and the TPB for predicting job search intensity.
Finally, our results demonstrate the application of social cognitive theory for predicting job search behavior. Consistent
with SCT, we found that environmental events (i.e., career-relevant activities) predict cognitive factors (i.e., job search self-
efficacy and job search clarity); environmental events and personal and cognitive factors predict job search intentions/goals;
and job search intention/goals and job search clarity predict behavior (i.e., job search intensity). The results also indicate the
importance of career-relevant activities for job search.

4.1. Implications for research and practice

The results for career-relevant activities suggest a number of implications for future research and practice. In terms of
research, an important follow-up to this study would be an experimental intervention that instructs job seekers on the ca-
reer-relevant activities investigated in this study. Experimental research is required in which job seekers are instructed to
use career exploration, career resources, and to attend training programs. In addition, more specific interventions that focus
on a specific career activity (e.g., career exploration) would also be worthwhile to better assess the causal effect of each of the
career-relevant activities on job search self-efficacy and job search clarity.
 Author's personal copy

126 J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127

The results of this study indicate the importance of job search objectives and support Kanfer et al.’s (2001) assertion that
employment goals activate search behavior to bring about the goal. Therefore, an important next step would be to measure
specific job search goals associated with things such as pay, benefits, type of work, and so on. In addition, future research
might also measure other components of social cognitive theory to provide a more complete test of the theory for job search.
While self-efficacy and goals are key mechanisms, other self-regulatory mechanisms such as self-monitoring and evaluative
self-reactions have not been studied.
With respect to practice, this study represents an important contribution to the job search literature as previous research
has focused on individual difference variables (e.g., conscientiousness) and situational variables (e.g., social support) that are
difficult for a job seeker to change. The results of this study suggest that job seekers can improve their job search clarity and
self-efficacy through career exploration, attending training programs, and by using various career resources such as career
centers and job search clubs. The results highlight the importance of being active career agents in managing today’s more
unstable and somewhat boundaryless career environment (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996).
Career counselors should focus on increasing job seeker’s job search self-efficacy and job search clarity. This should in-
volve setting goals for the type of work and job desired by job seekers followed by setting specific goals for things like
pay, benefits, location, work, and so on. In addition to career exploration, the use of various career resources, and identifying
training programs for job seekers to attend, career counselors should also encourage and instruct job seekers on how to self-
regulate their job search. This might be done in conjunction with interventions that are designed to increase job search self-
efficacy (Caplan et al., 1989; van Ryn & Vinokur, 1992). Thus, in addition to setting employment goals and strengthening job
search self-efficacy, job seekers should be instructed on how to monitor and evaluate their job search. In addition, a focus on
the benefits of job search might also help to create more positive job search attitudes and provide for better career self-man-
agement (King, 2004).

4.2. Study limitations

One of the limitations of this study is that it consisted of self-report data and as a result, common method variance might
have inflated the relationships among the variables (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). However, it is worth not-
ing that although the career-relevant activities were assessed by self-report, they are objective in nature (e.g., attending var-
ious training programs, going to a job search club, etc.) and should be less susceptible to perceptual distortion. This is
important given that a major focus of this study was the relationships between the career-relevant activities and job search
self-efficacy and job search clarity. However, the cross-sectional design at Time 1 does not allow us to make causal conclu-
sions about the relationships between the career-relevant activities and job search self-efficacy and job search clarity. Be-
cause we measured both sets of variables at the same time one has to use caution in making a causal connection. On the
positive side, job search intensity was measured 8 months after the other variables in the study providing greater confidence
that job search clarity and job search intention lead to a more intense job search.
Another limitation of this study is the sample attrition at Time 2 which resulted in a much smaller sample than Time 1.
Although there were no differences on the majority of study variables between those who responded at Time 2 and those
who did not, the non-respondents were somewhat younger and less educated and also had somewhat higher job search
self-efficacy. Because we also measured job search intensity at Time 1, we ran the regressions again for job search intensity
at Time 1. As with the results for Time 2, job search clarity and job search intention explained a significant amount of incre-
mental variance in job search intensity, and the regression coefficients for both were significant. Thus, job search clarity and
job search intention predicted job search intensity at Time 1 and 2.
Finally, because our sample included both employed and unemployed job seekers from a variety of disciplines, and the
majority had at least a college degree or technical training, our results should be generalizable to many other samples of job
seekers.

5. Conclusion

Despite the above limitations, this study is unique in its applied focus and for its use of social cognitive theory to integrate
career-relevant variables with variables from self-regulation theory and the theory of planned behavior. The results of this
study suggest that there are career-relevant activities that job seekers can engage in prior to their job search that are
positively related to job search self-efficacy and job search clarity, and that variables associated with self-regulation
theory (job search clarity) and the theory of planned behavior (job search intention) are important predictors of job search
intensity.

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundections of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.
Blau, G. J. (1994). Testing a two-dimensional measure of job search behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59, 288–312.
Blustein, D. L. (1997). A context-rich perspective of career exploration across the life roles. Career Development Quarterly, 45, 260–274.
 Author's personal copy

J. Zikic, A.M. Saks / Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009) 117–127 127

Brown, D. J., Cober, R. T., Kane, K., Levy, P. E., & Shalhoop, J. (2006). Proactive personality and the successful job search: A field investigation with college
graduates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 717–726.
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Person-organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 67, 294–311.
Caplan, R. D., Vinokur, A. D., Price, R. H., & van Ryn, M. (1989). Job seeking, reemployment, and mental health: A randomized field experiment in coping with
job loss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 759–769.
Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R. L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in Web or Internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
60, 821–836.
Côté, S., Saks, A. M., & Zikic, J. (2006). Trait affect and job search outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 233–252.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Employability: A psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
65, 14–38.
Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (2005). Jobs, Workers, Training and Careers (JWTC) Cluster Web Site Study: Final Report.
Jordaan, J. P. (1963). Exploratory behavior: The formation of self and occupational concepts. In D. E. Super (Ed.), Career development: Self-concept theory
(pp. 42–78). New York: College Entrance Examination.
Kanfer, R., Wanberg, C. R., & Kantrowitz, T. M. (2001). Job search and employment: A personality–motivational analysis and meta-analytic review. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86, 837–855.
King, Z. (2004). Career self-management: Its nature, causes and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 112–133.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–122.
Mathieu, J. E., Martineau, J. W., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1993). Individual and situational influences on the development of self-efficacy: Implications for
training effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 46, 125–147.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and
recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.
Prussia, G. E., Fugate, M., & Kinicki, A. J. (2001). Explication of the coping goal construct: Implications for coping and reemployment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86, 1179–1190.
Saks, A. M. (2005). Job search success: A review and integration of the predictors, behaviors, and outcomes. In S. Brown & R. Lent (Eds.), Career development
and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 155–179). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Multiple predictors and criteria of job search success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 400–415.
Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1999). Effects of individual differences and job search behaviors on the employment status of recent university graduates.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 335–349.
Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2000). Change in job search behaviors and employment outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 277–287.
Savickas, M. L. (1997). Career adaptability: An integrative construct for life-span, life-space theory. The Career Development Quarterly, 45, 247–259.
Schwab, D. P., Rynes, S. L., & Aldag, R. J. (1987). Theories and research on job search and choice. In K. M. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.). Research in personnel
and human resources management (Vol. 5, pp. 129–166). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Song, Z., Wanberg, C., Niu, X., & Xie, Y. (2006). Action-state orientation and the theory of planned behavior: A study of job search in China. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 68, 490–503.
Stumpf, S. A., Austin, E. J., & Hartman, K. (1984). The impact of career exploration and interview readiness on interview performance and outcomes. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 24, 221–235.
Stumpf, S. A., Colarelli, S. M., & Hartman, K. (1983). Development of the career exploration survey (CES). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 191–226.
Stumpf, S. A., & Hartman, K. (1984). Individual exploration to commitment and withdrawal. Academy of Management Journal, 2, 308–329.
Van Hooft, E. A. J., Born, M. P., Taris, T. W., & Van Der Flier, H. (2004a). Job search and the theory of planned behavior: Minority-majority group differences in
The Netherlands. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 366–390.
Van Hooft, E. A. J., Born, M. P., Taris, T. W., & Van Der Flier, H. (2005). Predictors and outcomes of job search behavior: The moderating effects of gender and
family situation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 133–152.
Van Hooft, E. A. J., Born, M. P., Taris, T. W., Van Der Flier, H., & Blonk, R. W. B. (2004b). Predictors of job search behavior among employed and unemployed
people. Personnel Psychology, 57, 25–59.
Van Ryn, M., & Vinokur, A. D. (1992). How did it work? An examination of the mechanisms through which an intervention for the unemployed promoted
job-search behavior. American Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 577–597.
Vinokur, A., & Caplan, R. D. (1987). Attitudes and social support: Determinants of job-seeking behavior and well-being among the unemployed. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 17, 1007–1024.
Wanberg, C. R., Glomb, T. M., Song, Z., & Sorenson, S. (2005). Job-search persistence during unemployment: A 10-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90, 411–430.
Wanberg, R. C., Hough, L. M., & Song, Z. (2002). Predictive validity of a multidisciplinary model of reemployment success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87,
1100–1120.
Wanberg, R. C., Kanfer, R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of networking intensity among unemployed job seekers. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85, 491–503.
Wanberg, C. R., Kanfer, R., & Rotundo, M. (1999). Unemployed individuals: Motives, job-search competencies, and job-search constraints as predictors of job
seeking and reemployment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 897–910.
Wanberg, R. C., Watt, J. D., & Rumsey, D. J. (1996). Individuals without jobs: An empirical study of job-seeking behaviour and reemployment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81, 76–87.
Werbel, J. D. (2000). Relationships among career exploration, job search intensity, and job search effectiveness in graduating college students. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 57, 379–394.
Zikic, J., & Klehe, U. (2006). Job loss as a blessing in disguise: The role of career exploration and career planning in predicting reemployment quality. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 69, 391–401.