Title: Increasing social networks through learning goal orientation key to job search success?

Authors: Bogdan Yamkovenko, PhD; J.P. Hatala, PhD.

Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Assistant Professors

Address: 1 Lomb Memorial Drive, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, 14623

Email: byamko1@gmail.com, jxhism@rit.edu

Stream: KM/Organizational Learning

Submission Type: Refereed

Increasing social networks through learning goal orientation key to job search success?

Networking is very important in job search. However, little research has examined why some people network more than others when searching for a job. This article explores the hypothetical relationship between social networking behaviors and goal orientation. Specifically, the focus is on discussing the job seeker's networking behaviors and how they vary depending on whether the job seeker is performance- or learning goal-oriented. The article synthesizes social networking theory, weak tie theory, and research on self-regulation to advance specific testable hypotheses about the relationship between these variables. The implications for job search literature and practice are discussed.

Introduction

Since the beginning of the global economic slowdown in 2008, job search has been an important concern and often a necessity for many who have become unemployed. Often, the process of finding a job is long and arduous, and requires effort and commitment from the job seeker. Kanfer, Wanberg, and Kantrowitz (2001) suggest that looking for a job is equivalent to an unstructured, ambiguous, and autonomous work task. It requires significant self-regulation on the part of the job seeker. The individual must set appropriate goals, structure the approach to the job search task, make decisions about the intensity of effort to exert, and periodically adjust efforts and strategies (Blau, 1994). Therefore, Kanfer, Wanberg, and Kantrowitz (2001) defined job search as the outcome of a dynamic, recursive self-regulated process. Individual, contextual, and task related variables combine into a complex network of variables when it comes to job search. This complexity makes it very difficult to explain the system in its entirety. In view of such difficulties, it is important to break the complex system into smaller and simpler elements. Self-regulatory mechanisms will be examined in this article as key determinants of an individual’s propensity to engage in behaviors of the job search process. Specifically, the focus will be on the relationship between networking behaviors in the job search situations and self-regulatory mechanisms.

Job Search

It is important at the outset to define the variables critical to the job search process and specify the boundaries of this study. First, the distinction should be made between the job search and the outcomes of the job search. The most important outcome of the job search is employment status. The employment status is often measured by asking an individual to report whether they are employed or unemployed by some predetermined time period (Kanfer et al., 2001).The other two employment outcome measures are job search duration and number of job offers.

One of the main antecedents of these outcomes is the job search intensity, which is a common measure of the job search (Saks, 2006). Job search intensity is often measured by asking an individual to indicate the frequency with which he or she engages in particular behaviors typical of the job search process (e.g., submitting resumes, going to job interviews). Job search effort is another measure of job search, and involves a self-reported perceived amount of effort exerted during the job search. Although this second measure has stronger relationships with job search outcomes, it is more vulnerable to exaggeration and impression management on the part of the respondents (Kanfer et al., 2001). In addition, the job search effort measure does not capture the variety of behaviors that are salient in the job search process. For example, in assessing the intensity of the job search process researchers can determine whether job seekers engaged in such behaviors as attending job fairs and resume writing classes, soliciting feedback on their resume characteristics, tailoring resumes and cover letters to each specific position, and reaching out to various social resources.

The self-regulated nature of the process of job search suggests that it is likely to change over time, which means that the intensity of the job search, and therefore frequency of various job search behaviors, can decrease, increase, or remain stable (Wanberg, Glomb, Song, & Sorenson, 2005). Wanberg et al. (2005) suggest that getting discouraged, adjusting the goals, and uncertainty about what to do next, may all contribute to the change in job search intensity. This complexity of the job search behaviors is a function of interaction of personal tendencies, personal and social conditions, and desire to obtain employment (Kanfer et al., 2001).

Getting discouraged and adjusting goals are the elements of the complex system of self-regulatory mechanisms. Based on socio-cognitive theory, planning and forethought, reflection, self-efficacy evaluation, and self-monitoring are all important in this process (Bandura, 1990). It is therefore instructive to examine the job search process in terms of these self-regulatory mechanisms.

Self-efficacy and Goal Orientation

Bandura produced an extensive program of research, which examined self-efficacy as a predictor of various educational, personal, and vocational outcomes. In addition, self-efficacy beliefs are an important self-regulatory mechanism. Based on the negative feedback loop, an individual sets a goal in accordance with one’s self-efficacy beliefs. As an individual progresses toward the goal, through self-monitoring, the discrepancy between the current state and the goal is assessed. Based on this assessment, either the effort or goal difficulty is adjusted. Performance on the tasks essential to reaching the goal affects one’s assessment of task self-efficacy. As the cycle repeats, future goals are set in accordance with the self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997).

Self-efficacy, however, is not the only mechanism that operates in this process. Goal orientations contribute to the self-regulatory process by affecting the types of goals set (Kanfer, 1990). Goal orientation refers to the goals pursued by individuals in achievement situations (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Learning- and performance-goal orientation - two broad categories of the construct - have been shown to influence different types of performance outcomes and to evoke various types of behaviors in performance settings (e.g., Arenas et al., 2006; Button, Mathieu, & Zajac, 1996; Sujan, Weitz, & Kumar, 1994; VandeWalle, 2001). Because of the nature of this construct, it is specifically related to dispositional and situational goal preferences in achievement situations (Payne, Youngcourt, & Beaubien, 2007).

The relationship of goal orientation and self-efficacy has been investigated but the findings are not consistent. For example, some researchers tested structural models with self-efficacy as an antecedent of goal orientations, while other studies suggested that goal orientation predicts self-efficacy beliefs (Chiaburu & Marinova, 2005; Kanfer, 1990). Whenever self-regulatory mechanisms are studied it is important to include self-efficacy in the models because of the substantial research findings that show strong influences of self-efficacy on a variety of outcomes (Bandura, 1990). We discuss it here to elucidate the complex system of self-regulatory mechanisms and to help the reader understand the important variables in this context. In empirical studies of the hypotheses advanced in this article it would be important to include self-efficacy measures as control variables so that the variance explained by self-efficacy in an outcome could be removed and only the variance explained by goal-orientation could be isolated.

Originally, researchers proposed two types of goals, focused either on performance or on learning (Button, Mathieu, & Zajac 1996; Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Specifically, individuals with high learning-goal orientation focus on increasing their learning or task competence, seeking challenges, and persisting in the case of failure (Dweck & Legget, 1988). In contrast, individuals with high performance-goal orientation are interested in demonstrating task competence through gaining positive and avoiding negative judgments of competence. The performance-oriented individuals tend to avoid challenges, decrease their effort and persistence following failure, and fear negative evaluation by others (Button et al., 1996). Performance-goal orientation was later dichotomized into performance approach and performance avoidance goal orientation (VandeWalle, 1997). Although this conceptualization is interesting for the nomological studies of goal orientation, for the current purpose the distinction between learning and performance goal orientation is sufficient. Performance goals, be they approach or avoidance, are rooted in fixed perceptions of ability. Consequently, performance avoidance and approach individuals tend to assess their performance through normative comparisons and do not set challenging goals (VandeWalle, 1997). It is this

entity perception of ability and the normative comparisons it leads the person to rely on, that drives the key distinction between learning and performance goal orientations.

Performance-goal orientation is essentially manifested in a shortsighted effort to “look good” to others (VandeWalle, 2001). Therefore, it can be surmised that goal orientation indicates whether an individual is interested in long-term success and development or short-term attainment of an objective. Performance goal-oriented individuals select a task they know can be accomplished using what they know, because they tend to believe their skills are fixed, and are discouraged by mistakes and failure (VandeWalle, 2001). These individuals may not persevere when obstacles arise and will avoid challenging tasks. Because being discouraged by failure and criticism may curb development and lead to subpar performance, performance-goal orientation may lead to goal abandonment and downward adjustment of goal difficulty.

Learning-goal orientation, on the other hand, affects achievement situations differently. Individuals with learning-goal orientation are focused on developing new skills, attempting to understand new skills, and successfully achieving self-referenced standards for mastery (Ford, Weissbein, Smith, Salas, & Gully, 1998). They prefer challenging tasks, and therefore may aspire to achieve more than their counterparts with performance goals do. They believe that their efforts lead to success and exhibit greater persistence in the face of difficulties. In uncertain and new situations, learning-goal orientation may help individuals deal with obstacles and view errors as learning opportunities. Additionally, learning-oriented individuals view negative feedback as useful diagnostic information that can help facilitate skill development (Arenas et al., 2006; Ford et al., 1998).

The matter is complicated further when the possible sources of goal orientations are examined. Dweck and Legget (1988) hypothesized that implicit theories of intelligence influence the type of goal orientations people adopt. Some view their ability as fixed, others view it as malleable. Those that view ability as fixed often adopt performance goals, which eventually leads to attributions of performance levels to ability or lack thereof. Those that perceive their ability to be malleable attribute their performance to effort (Dweck & Legget, 1988; Kanfer, 1990).

A large body of the research on goal orientations was done in the educational setting with children. In adults, however, the adoption of performance goals versus learning goals may also be affected by the task characteristics, task instructions, and environmental characteristics (Kanfer, 1990). In addition, adults do not always view intelligence as a unitary construct. Instead it may be conceptualized in terms of three factors – problem solving, verbal ability, and social competence. Current literature suggests that assessment of ability and task characteristics may influence goal orientation. This leads to further ambiguity of defining goal orientation as a state versus

trait. Originally Dweck (1986) and Vandewalle (1990) conceptualized goal orientation as a relatively stable trait-like construct. However some studies induced learning and performance goals, thus showing that goal orientation may also be seen as a state (Wood & Bandura, 1989).

This distinction is especially important if task characteristics influence individual adoption of learning versus performance goal orientation because this also implies state-like properties for this construct. The possibility of inducement of a particular goal orientation makes it an important variable in the job search context. Unlike traits, that are relatively stable and difficult to alter, self-regulatory mechanisms like self-efficacy and goal orientation can be changed through interventions, which means they can be advantageous in job search training contexts. In the next section we will examine current research on the role of goal orientation in job search.

Goal Orientation and Job Search

Earlier in this paper we mentioned Kanfer’s (1990) assertion that job search is a dynamic, self-regulatory process, akin to performance in an uncertain, autonomous job task. As such, both goal orientation and self-efficacy play an important role in this process. Van Hooft and Nordzij (2009) suggest that job search is a deliberative phase during which individuals process information available to them. This phase ends in the formation of state goal orientation, which in turn guides the behavior job seekers engage in during the process of a search for a job. Given that goal orientation is a motivational construct (Payne et al., 2007), the decisions that are formed along with the goal orientation are those that define direction, level, and intensity of effort. This means that the behavioral stage, which comes after deliberative phase, will be to some extent determined by the decisions made in the deliberative stage.

If an individual decides to adopt learning goal orientation, particular behaviors, like advice seeking, persistent attempts at solving problems, and use of various strategies, are likely to occur. At the same time, other behaviors like challenge avoidance and withdrawal after negative feedback, are less likely to occur (Elliot & Dweck, 1988). Conversely, if an individual adopts performance goal orientation, the opposite is likely. In addition, learning goal and performance goal oriented individuals select and set goals of varied difficulty (Elliot & Dweck, 1988). This means that in a job search situation, performance goal oriented individuals may set goals of lower difficulty and lower standards for themselves. This could translate into sending out fewer resumes, making fewer contacts, or not applying to positions similar to the ones from which an individual gets rejected. These behaviors suggest lower intensity of job search and, as discussed above, lower intensity of job search behaviors leads to lower likelihood of finding a job. Therefore, performance goal oriented individuals may be at a disadvantage in their job search efforts.

Lower intensity of job search may also stem from the perceptions of ability as fixed and viewing effort as an indicator of low ability (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Performance oriented individuals perceive that their failures are the results of their low ability and an increase in effort will not lead to an improved performance. Therefore, any failure in the job search process, like a rejection letter, lack of interviews, or absence of a callback is predictive of future failures to such individuals. Because performance oriented individuals attempt to avoid failures and only engage in tasks that display their competence to others, they may limit their job search activities, thus reducing their chances of getting an interview and eventually finding a new place of employment. Van Hooft and Nordzij (2009) posit that the difficulty and independent nature of the job search process calls for an individual that sets challenging goals and persists at achieving these goals. Therefore, learning goal orientation and learning goal orientation training may increase the job search intensity, thereby increasing the likelihood of finding a job. Because learning goal-oriented individuals attribute failure to effort, any setbacks in the job search process are attributed to low effort. The effort is then increased by analyzing and changing job search strategies (Van Hooft & Nordzij, 2009). This means that learning goal oriented individuals may engage in a variety of job search behaviors, and adjust these behaviors if some of the behaviors or strategies are not effective. For example, after sending out resumes and not getting callbacks, learning goal oriented individuals may expand their efforts by going to job fairs, calling people they know, and participating in job search educational programs.

In essence, the difference between learning goal oriented and performance goal oriented job seekers is in the adaptive versus maladaptive responses to situations that arise through the job search process (Van Hooft & Nordzij, 2009). Individuals with learning goal orientation generate effective strategies, persist through difficulties and obstacles, and generate more effort- all of which leads to the higher likelihood of success on the task of the job search. Conversely, individuals with performance goal orientation tend to withdraw if difficulties and challenges arise, exert little effort, and use defensive strategies. Such patterns are supported by empirical and meta-analytic studies (Payne et al., 2007; Utman, 1997; Dweck and Leggett, 1988).

It is important to elaborate on the implications of state goal orientation for the job search process. Much of the research that examined the influences of goal orientation on important vocational, educational, and life outcomes focused on trait goal orientation (Vandewalle, 1997, Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Chiaburu & Marinova, 2005). In older studies of goal orientation, it was suggested that trait goal orientation is a trait-like construct but if a situation offers strong contextual cues about rewards, competition, effort, and evaluation standards, such cues may influence goal orientation (Vandewalle & Cummings, 1997). Van Hooft and Nordzij (2009) induced stage goal orientation while controlling for trait goal orientation. In their study, they found that a workshop that

helped job seekers set learning goals resulted in higher reemployment probabilities and higher intentions to engage in job seeking than a workshop on setting performance goals. This finding has important implications for job search in general and for the argument that the authors of this article are developing. Helping job seekers set learning goals rather than performance goals may increase the intensity of their job search effort and reduce their focus on normative comparisons.

As discussed earlier, the goal orientation construct may have its roots in incremental and entity perceptions of ability. Learning goal oriented individuals perceive their ability as incremental or malleable, and evaluate their competence according to whether they have mastered the task. Performance goal oriented individuals perceive their ability as fixed and evaluate their performance by comparing it to the performance of others (Elliot and McGregor, 2001). The difference between an intrapersonal standard and a normative standard may have serious implications in the job search process. People who make normative comparisons and want to avoid tasks that may expose their perceived low ability to others may refrain from important job seeking behaviors like feedback seeking. Ashford (1989) suggested that people evaluate the costs of feedback-seeking behaviors and among these costs are ego and self-presentation costs. Negative feedback may increase perceived ego costs. Self-presentation costs are those of exposing one’s uncertainty and need for help. In addition, Ashford and Cummings (1983) noted that feedback seeking often entails considerable effort. In view of these suggestions, it is possible that performance goal oriented individuals may refrain from seeking feedback because they may perceive the ego costs and self-presentation costs to be very high as they consider negative feedback and exposing their need for help to be an evaluation of their level of ability. This proposition was supported empirically (VandeWalle & Cummings, 1997). In job search, feedback seeking is often an important part of the process. Job seekers may benefit significantly from asking for feedback on their resumes and cover letters, soliciting feedback from others on their interviewing abilities and even asking for feedback from job interviewers to obtain information about the skills and experience they may be missing.

To extend the notion of feedback seeking further, similar mechanisms may operate in situations that require interaction with others in the job seekers’ network or outside of it. Many parts of job search process, including job fairs, job search education programs, and reaching out to acquaintances to inquire about openings, may have similar ego and self-presentation costs and may be perceived by the job seeker as opportunities to expose a weakness or low ability to others.

The job search may also be a highly social task. Looking for a new place of employment often involves leveraging resources within one’s network, making efforts to expand one’s network, making social comparisons, and processing various types of feedback from others. Research suggests that many jobs are often found through some sort of

networking, which includes contacting friends, acquaintances, and family (Granovetter, 1995; Schwab, Rynes, & Aldag, 1987). In addition, there is extensive research that investigated the value of networking in industries where positions are not typically advertised in the media, and in employment among graduating college students. In both cases, the findings suggest that networking is an effective informal method of job search (Stevens, Tirnauer & Turban, 1997; Meyer & Shadle, 1994). To fully understand the implications of social networks for the job search process it is instructive to review some research in this area.

A Social Network Theory Approach to Job Search

Research has suggested that an individual’s network is critical to social mobility (Dominguez & Watkins, 2003; Erickson, 1996; Lin, 2001; Stanton-Salazar & Dombusch, 1995). More specifically, individuals with higher levels of social capital have access to social resources that can be utilized to achieve a desired objective, such as searching for a job (Burt, 2001; Flap, 1999; Lin, 2001). As a result, those people who possess effective networking skills may experience a more favorable social position within their network and consequently have a greater exposure to job related information (Blau, 1993; Brass, 1984; Lin, 2001; Mehra, Kilduff, & Brass, 2001; Pfeffer, 1991). The social position determines the potential benefits the individual may receive from their network. These benefits can be viewed as the ability to access social capital, where certain structural attributes (e.g., centrality, structural holes, strength of ties) lead to resources that will help achieve the desired objective. Therefore, an individual’s social position within a network may help to determine the utility of the network itself.

The term network typically refers to a set of objects or nodes and the mapping of the interaction and relationships between the objects (Parker et al., 2001; Wasserman & Faust, 1994). Social network theory refers to the objects as people or groups of people. By measuring the interactivity of individuals through mapping relationships, researchers can uncover the dynamics that exist between and within groups.

Social capital is one example of why social network theory is studied. By understanding the mappings connecting individuals to a set of others, we stand to learn much about how individuals use their connections to achieve desired outcomes (Coleman, 1988). From a job search perspective, actors within the network can improve behaviors or gain access to job- related information based on the connections they possess. In addition, the level of social capital helps to determine how individuals use their position within a network to accumulate power in social settings (Tucker et al., 1996). The process in which social network theories were tested and validated involved the empirical rigor of social network analysis.

Some of the formal theoretical properties in the network perspective include centrality (betweenness, closeness, and degree), position (structural), strength of ties (strong or weak, weighted or discrete), cohesion (groups, cliques), and division (structural holes, partition) (Scott, 2000; Wasserman & Faust, 1994). These represent the building blocks for developing and conceptualizing network theory (White, 1997). Network theories of social structure are concerned not only with quantitative studies of social networks but the process in which theory is established and the identification of linkage and context effects.

A social network theory approach to conducting a job search (Auslander & Litwin, 1988, 1991; Smith, 1989; Specht, 1986) suggests that social networks establish norms for behaviour within a group, including accelerated job-search activity. Social networks may provide information and opportunity that are relevant to becoming re-employed by supplying additional contacts. Additionally, social network theory explains the interpersonal mechanisms and social structures that exist among interacting units: small groups, large groups, departments, units, within organizations, and between organizations (Wasserman & Faust, 1994). More specifically, it is the study of how the relationships of a person, group, or organization affect beliefs or behaviors. The theory relates to a number of levels of analysis that can be used to determine the interaction between individuals and their environment.

One approach to conceptualizing social capital is weak tie theory (Granovetter, 1973). The strength of weak ties theory demonstrated that job opportunities for mid-level managers were most likely to come from an individual’s weak ties versus the strong connections in their network. Strong ties consisted of close relationships (family, co-workers, close friends) that provided information that was widely shared and became quickly redundant within the clique. Granovetter (1973) viewed weak ties as a connection to densely knit networks outside the individual’s direct contacts which could provide non-redundant information. It was more likely that weak ties rather than strong ties would provide a greater opportunity for new information about job leads. In essence, the weak tie theory focuses on the characteristics of the tie between actors.

On the basis of this conceptualization, examining the job seekers’ social network will help to reveal the ties an individual possesses and how they affect their job search. Those individuals that seek support from their weak tie connections are not only more likely to receive non-redundant job-related information but also gain access to job opportunities not found in traditional sources (Yakubovich, 2005). If barriers to connecting with weak ties exist, the transition back into the labor market may be delayed. This delay can have severe implications for self-efficacy and other self-regulatory mechanisms, which, in turn, may restrict one’s ability to affectively conduct the job search (Fort, Jacquet & Leroy, 2011).

Goal Orientation, Social Networks and Job Search

In view of the discussion of self-regulatory mechanisms, social networks, and job search research, it is clear that both networking behaviors and goal orientation are important concepts to consider. Whereas research has examined the individual influences of goal orientation and networking behaviors on job search success (Van Hooft & Nordzij, 2009; Wanberg, Kanfer & Banas, 2000), there are no studies that examined the interaction of these variables. In addition, the studies that looked at predictors of networking behaviors, studied stable individual characteristics like extraversion that have a high genetic component and attitudinal variables like networking comfort (Wanberg, Kanfer, & Banas, 2000). Such variables, albeit informative, offer only limited help in designing an intervention to increase job search success, because traits are stable and attitudes may not influence all three motivational decisions about exerting effort, setting a level of effort, and persisting at that level of effort .

Goal orientation is a motivational construct and may offer explanatory information about differential engagement in networking behaviors by learning goal- and performance goal- oriented individuals. Two streams of research evidence provide support for both propositions in this paper. First, Rudloph, Flynn, Abaied, and Agoston (2011) examined the influence of goal orientation on peer interaction among children and children’s responses to peer aggression. Their premise was that development or learning goals resulted in more adaptive patterns of responses to peer interaction in general and peer aggression specifically. Performance approach goals involved gaining positive social judgments and performance avoidance goals involved minimizing negative social judgment. Respectively, learning goals were hypothesized to result in adaptive responses of understanding and learning from the situation, problem solving, and seeking help. Performance goals were hypothesized to lead to maladaptive responses of retaliation or helplessness and denial in the case of performance approach goals and ignoring negative situations to avoid attention and embarrassment in case of performance avoidance goals. These hypotheses were supported empirically (Rudolph et al., 2011). These findings are also consistent with previous research that showed that performance goals lead to withdrawal in challenging situations and unintentional and intentional disengagement from stress (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Erdley et al.,1997). It is important to recognize that these findings are reported for a sample of young children and the processes occurring among adults are likely to be more complex. However, just like the research on goal orientation found its beginnings in educational research and the construct later generalized to adult context, these findings should be examined in the adult context.

The second source of support for the proposition that goal orientation may explain differential engagement in social networking behaviors is the study discussed earlier that focused on feedback seeking behaviors. The findings of the study by Vandewalle

and Cummings (1997) suggested that learning goal oriented individuals engage in feedback seeking behavior more than performance goal oriented individual. This parallels the findings of the study by Rudolph et al. (2011) and offers preliminary support for the applicability of this finding to adult context. Therefore proposition one is:

Learning goal-oriented individuals will engage in social networking behaviors more frequently than performance goal-oriented individuals.

The synthesis of these findings and streams of research may suggest a more specific relationship between goal orientation and social networking in the job search situation. We suggest that learning goal oriented individuals may not only seek feedback from their contacts more often than performance goal oriented individuals but may also reach out to their weak ties more frequently. Learning goal-oriented individuals focus on task mastery, in our case the mastery of the job search task. This means that they may attempt a variety of strategies in the job search and may try to perfect and master those strategies. This will require seeking feedback from employers on interview results and performance; asking others to review and edit one’s resume - thereby exposing one’s skills and achievements to others; and calling acquaintances to inform them about a need for a new place of employment. All these situations may have high ego costs and may be threatening to performance goal oriented individuals who are concerned about preserving their image and exposing low ability to others. Performance goal oriented individuals may refrain from reaching out to weak ties due to the perception that sharing information about their unemployment may indicate their personal lack of ability and skills. And given that weak ties are represented by acquaintances and people with whom the job seeker may not have close relationships, the ego and presentation costs may be even higher. Therefore proposition two is:

Learning goal-oriented individuals will contact weak ties more frequently compared with performance goal-oriented individuals.

These differences may be observable through specific actions that performance- and learning goal- oriented individuals take during the job search process. For instance, performance goal oriented individuals may avoid participating in job fairs. They may refrain from asking others to provide feedback on their resume, or asking others to comment on the skills they may need to succeed in the job search. All this may not only reduce the chances of job search success or extend the period of time needed to find a job but also impede long term skill development and further minimize the chances of a return to the workforce. In the current economic situation, a lack of relevant skills may be one of the reasons for prolonged unemployment. Reaching out to weak ties in one’s network is thus beneficial from the standpoint of maximizing the chances of learning about job openings and about the skills sought by employers. Learning goal orientation

may then be instrumental in both seeking such feedback and then learning the skills required to succeed in finding a job.

Implications for Research and Practice and Role of HRD

The practical implications of the hypotheses put forth in this article, if supported empirically, are far reaching. First, unlike personality traits, proper goal orientation can be induced and trained. There are studies today that discuss workshops that are designed to set learning goals. If job seekers are taught to set proper goals, they may become more persistent in job search and cope better with the setbacks during the process, view their social network as a source of feedback and assistance, and in general be more successful in achievement situations, such as a job search. Setting learning goals may lead to a more structured approach to job search and may increase one’s chances to learn new marketable skills. Simple training interventions may help reduce not only the time it takes to find a job, but also the pool of unemployed. This could be one of the many steps needed to expedite the economic recovery, and compared to others, it could be a relatively simple one.

The implications for research are equally important. As mentioned earlier there are very few studies that examine the relationship between self-regulatory mechanisms and social networking behaviors. Studies that look at these variables in the context of job search do not exist. Empirical research on this topic will help elucidate the explanatory power of goal orientation in social networking situations, clarify relative importance of self-efficacy and goal orientation constructs within self-regulatory domain, and further the knowledge in the state versus trait differentiation of the goal orientation construct.

HRD should play a prominent role in addressing the fallout of the economic crisis, specifically unemployment. Job search is inextricably tied to the learning and development of an individual. As such, it provides fertile ground for HRD research and practice. The cross-disciplinary nature of HRD offers an exceptional opportunity to address this situation by capitalizing on two areas of research. The research in the areas of industrial psychology and social psychology can help inform practice in terms of the intervention design, goal setting, and inner workings of social networks. The research and practice of adult learning will help inform the design of training programs for job seekers that would focus on both job search techniques and mastery of new skills required by the workforce of the 21st century.

References

Arenas, A., Tabernero, C., & Briones, E. (2006). Effects of goal orientation, error orientation and self-efficacy on performance in an uncertain situation. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 34(5), 569-586. renas et al (2006)

Ashford, S. J. (1989). Self-assessments in organizations. In L. L.Cummings & B.Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 11, (pp. 133–174). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Ashford, S. J., & Cummings, L. L. (1983). Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32, 370–398.

Auslander, G., & Litwin, H. (1988). Social networks and the poor: toward effective policy and practice. Social Work, 33, 234-238

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman

Belliveau, M. (2005). Blind ambition? The effects of social networks and institutional sex composition on the job search outcomes of elite coeducational and women's college graduates. Organization Science, 16(2).

Blau, P. M. (1993). Multilevel structural analysis. Social Networks, 15, 210-215.

Blau, G. (1994). Testing a two-dimensional measure of job-search behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59, 288–312

Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place at the right time: a structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 518-539.

Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 26-48.

Chiaburu, D. S., & Marinova, S. V. (2005). What predicts skill transfer? An exploratory study of goal orientation, training self-efficacy and organizational supports. International Journal of Training & Development, 9(2), 110-123.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.

Dominguez, S., & Watkins, C. (2003). Creating networks for survival and mobility: Social capital among AfricanAmerican and Latin-American low-income mothers. Social Problems, 50(1).

Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.

Dweck, C.S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-274

Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5–12.

Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. (1999). Test anxiety and the hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 76, 628−644

Erickson, B. H. (1996). Culture, class and connections. American Journal of Sociology, 102(1), 217-251.

Ford, J. K., Weissbein, D. A., Smith, E. M., Salas, E., & Gully, S. M. (1998). Relationships of goal orientation, metacognitive activity, and practice strategies with learning outcomes and transfer. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 218-233.

Fort, I., Jacquet, F. & Leroy, N. (2011). Self-efficacy, goals, and job search behaviors. Career Development International, 16(5), 469-481.

Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.

Hatala, J.P. (2007). Making a career transition: a social network approach. The Canadian Journal of Career Development, 6(1), 28–38.

Kanfer, R. (1990). Motivation and individual differences in learning: An integration of developmental, differential and cognitive perspectives. Learning and Individual Differences, 2(2), 221-239.

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.

Lamba, N. K. (2003). The employment experiences of Canadian refugees: measuring the impact of humasocial capital on quality of employment. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 40(1).

Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: a theory of social structure and action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mehra, A., Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (2001). The social networks of high and low self-monitors: implications for workplace performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46.

Meyer, J. L., & Shadle, C. C. (1994). The changing outplacement process: New methods and opportunities for transition management. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Payne, S. C., Youngcourt, S. S., & Beaubien, J. M. (2007). A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Goal Orientation Nomological Net. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 128-150.

Parker, A., Cross, R., & Walsh, D. (2001). Improving collaboration with social network analysis. Levering knowledge in the informal organization. Knowledge Management Review, 4, 24-28.

Pfeffer, J. (1991). Organization theory and structural perspectives on management. Journal of Management, 17, 789-803.

Rudolph, K. , Abaied, J. , Flynn, M. , Sugimura, N. , & Agoston, A. (2011). Developing relationships, being cool, and not looking like a loser: Social goal orientation predicts children's responses to peer aggression. Child Development, 82(5), 1518-1530.

Saks, A. M. (2006). Multiple Predictors and Criteria of Job Search Success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 400-415

Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Smith, S. (1999). An exploration into the efficacy of African Americans’ job referral networks. African American Research Perspectives, 5(1).

Specht, H. (1986). Social support, social networks, social exchange, and social work practice. Social Service Review, 60, 218-40.

Stanton-Salazar, R. D., & Dombusch, S. M. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school students. Sociology of Education, 68(2).

Sujan, H., Weitz, B. A., & Kumar, N. (1994). Learning orientation, working Smart, and fffective Selling. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 39-52.

Stevens, C. K., Tirnauer, D. C., & Turban, D. B. (1997, August). A qualitative study of job seekers' decision processes. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management, Boston, MA.

Schwab, D. P., Rynes, S. L., & Aldag, R. J. (1987). Theories and research on job search and choice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 5, 129–166.

Utman, C. H. (1997). Performance effects of motivational state: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 170−182

Vandewalle, D. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 995-1015.

Vandewalle, D. (2001). Goal orientation: Why wanting to look successful doesn’t lead to success. Organizational Dynamics, 30, 162-171

VandeWalle, D. , & Cummings, L. (1997). A test of the influence of goal orientation on the feedback-seeking process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 390-400.

Van Hooft, E., Noordzij, G. (2009) The Effects of Goal Orientation on Job Search and Reemployment: A Field Experiment Among Unemployed Job Seekers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94 (6), 1581–1590

Van Hoyle, G, Van Hooft, E. & Lievens, F. (2010). Networking as a job search behaviour: A social network perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 82 (3), 661–682.

Villar, E., Juan, J., Corominas, E., & Capell, D. (2000). What kind of networking strategy advice should career counsellors offer university graduates searching for a job? British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 28(3).

Wanberg, Glomb, Song, & Sorenson, 2005)

Wanberg, C. R., Kanfer, R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of networking intensity among unemployed job seekers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 491-503

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

White, D. R. (1997). What is network theory? Retrieved May 2, 2005, from http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/drwhite/netsyl96.htm

Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conception of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 407-415

Yakubovich, V. (2005). Weak ties, information, and influence: how workers find jobs in a local Russian labor market. American Sociological Review, 70(3), 408-421.