A Discrepancy Model of Information System Personnel Turnover 2002 PDF

This article was downloaded by: [Ecole Hautes Etudes Commer-
Montreal]
On: 19 August 2015, At: 20:00
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG
Journal of Management
Information Systems
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/mmis20
A Discrepancy Model
of Information System
Personnel Turnover
James J. Jiang, Gary Klein
Published online: 09 Jan 2015.
To cite this article: James J. Jiang, Gary Klein (2002) A Discrepancy Model of
Information System Personnel Turnover, Journal of Management Information
Systems, 19:2, 249-272
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045722
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and
views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor
& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information.
Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions
Downloaded by [Ecole Hautes Etudes Commer-Montreal] at 20:00 19 August 2015
A DISCREPANCY MODEL OF INFORMATION SYSTEM PERSONNEL TURNOVER 249
A Discrepancy Model of
Information System
Personnel Turnover
JAMES J. JIANG AND GARY KLEIN
JAMES J. JIANG is a professor of Management Information Systems at the University

of Central Florida. He obtained his Ph.D. in Information Systems at the University of
Cincinnati. His research interests include IS project management, marketing category
management dynamic modeling, and IS personnel management. He has published
over 70 academic articles in these areas. He teaches programming, database manage-
ment, and IS project implementation and management. He has made professional
presentations on IS project management in Taiwan and the United States. He is a
member of the IEEE Computer Society, Association for Computing Machinery, De-
cision Sciences Institute, and Project Management Institute.
GARY KLEIN is the Couger Professor of Information Systems at the University of

Colorado in Colorado Springs. He obtained his Ph.D. in Management Science at
Purdue University. He previously served as Dean of the School of Business at the
University of Texas of the Permian Basin. Before that time, he served with Arthur
Andersen & Company in Kansas City and was director of the Information Systems
department for a regional financial institution. His interests include project manage-
ment, knowledge management, system development, and mathematical modeling with
over 75 academic publications in these areas. In addition to being an active partici-
pant in international conferences, he has made professional presentations on Deci-
sion Support Systems in the United States and Japan, where he once served as a guest
professor at Kwansei Gakuin University. He is a member of the IEEE Computer
Society, Association for Computing Machinery, Institute of Operations Research and
the Management of Sciences, Society of Competitive Information Professionals, De-
cision Sciences Institute, and Project Management Institute.
ABSTRACT: Turnover of information system (IS) personnel is a critical problem for

organizations. To gain a better understanding of turnover, researchers have explored
career orientations that characterize an employee’s internal motivations and desires.
The inability of an organization to match career desires is often related to measures
indicative of turnover in IS employees, including intent to leave and career dissatis-
faction, though empirical evidence is indirect and inconclusive. Using career orienta-
tions, this study explicitly models the impact of the discrepancy between the wants of
employees and employee perceptions of how their organization satisfies those wants.
The model is based on discrepancy theory and predicts the gap is closely related to
the turnover indicators. Model predictions hold true for a sample of 153 IS personnel.
These results indicate the importance of developing career plans that employees per-
ceive as matching their wants.
KEY WORDS AND PHRASES: career orientations, career satisfaction, discrepancy theory,
employee turnover, information systems personnel.
Journal of Management Information Systems / Fall 2002, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 249–272.
© 2002 M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
0742–1222 / 2002 $9.50 + 0.00.
250 JIANG AND KLEIN
A CONTINUING CHALLENGE IN MANAGING information systems (IS) personnel is the

high turnover rate in the profession. Ever since statistics have been kept, IS turnover
has been a problem. Annual turnover in the IS field ranged between 15 percent and 20
percent during the 1960s and the early 1970s. In the late 1970s, the turnover ran to as
high as 28 percent annually and to 20 percent in the early 1980s. By the 1990s, the
turnover rate reached 25 percent to 33 percent annually. Many Fortune 500 firms
have 25 percent to 35 percent turnover rate among their IS personnel [30]. Turnover
estimates for IS managers alone range from 15 percent to 40 percent annually.
Gaining control of the turnover issue is critical for the IS manager. Turnover has
been tied to failed systems projects and inadequate deployment of an organization’s

IS resources [6, 36]. Research that examines controllable predictors of turnover, in-
cluding intent to leave and career satisfaction, is therefore clearly of value to IS man-
agers. Understanding the predictors of employees’ decisions to leave an organization
may give managers more input into staff career planning decisions. Effective career
planning is an essential element in the containment of the turnover problem [6, 34,
37, 51]. Still, solid guidance in the career planning of IS personnel is quite limited
[24, 48].
In the past, considerations were given the implementation of a dual-career ladder as
a device for better career planning [24]. A dual-career ladder has the advantage for
the employee of allowing both technical and managerial career path options; it pro-
vides flexibility in satisfying either want [3]. This may not be an effective tool for
dealing with various career concerns of IS personnel, as it assumes two options will
be sufficient. Baroudi [3] provides evidence that such a division is ineffective.
More recent research indicates that IS professionals have more than just technical
and managerial wants and examines whether employee wants are related to turnover
indicators, such as career satisfaction and intent to leave [14, 28, 31, 38]. However,
only a weak relationship between wants and career decision indicators is found. What
employees want may not be sufficient to explain intent to leave or career satisfaction.
Van Maanen and Schein [54] suggest we must consider both the wants of the em-
ployee and the degree to which they feel these desires are satisfied. They argue that if
employees are to remain satisfied and motivated, there must be congruence between
their wants and what they “have.” Ginzberg and Baroudi propose “when an indi-
vidual finds that his or her internal career needs are met by the external career options
made possible by the organization, she or he will more likely remain with the organi-
zation” [24, p. 593]. Both of these arguments would lead one to expect that gaps
between career “wants” and “haves” would lead to a worsening of turnover rates.
Along this line, researchers find a positive relationship between career satisfaction
as affected by the match between IS employee wants and the job positions they have
[38]. Further works report a relationship between wants and career satisfaction as
well as a relationship between what employees perceive they have and career satis-
faction, an indicator of turnover [31, 39]. The next step is to examine the gap between
the “have” and the “want” and how it relates to specific turnover indicators.
Career Orientation and Turnover

EARLY RESEARCH INTO IS PERSONNEL TURNOVER examines the predictive power of a
few proposed indicator variables, including intent to leave and career satisfaction.
Tests of a causal model find job satisfaction, rewards, and organizational commit-
ment all significantly and negatively related to turnover [5]. Another causal model
relating boundary spanning, role ambiguity, role conflict, job satisfaction, and orga-
nizational commitment is partially supported, although all the variables are strong
predictors in a regression model [2]. Perceptions of pay and latitude equity are also
found to be important in predicting turnover intention [19]. A more complete causal
model indicates that certain demographic variables, career opportunity variables, and
career satisfaction are also related to turnover intention [33].
In 1988, Ginzberg and Baroudi suggested ten propositions “need [to] be answered
before more specific recommendations for DP/MIS careers can be formulated” [24].
These ten propositions have influenced much subsequent work in the investigation of
IS personnel turnover. The first three propositions are intricately related to each other
and to the issue of turnover. The first one, that management information systems
(MIS) personnel will have a diversity of career wants as expressed by their anchors or
orientations, has been supported by several researchers [14, 31, 38].
Career orientations represent the essential component of self-concept that an em-
ployee is unwilling to relinquish even in the face of difficult decisions. Such orienta-
tions represent the basic career needs and wants of the employee [25]. Schein [50]
identified nine career anchors:
1. Managerial competence—individual pursues greater responsibility for accom-

plishing results through others.
2. Technical competence—individual focuses primarily on the exercise of tech-
nical expertise.
3. Job security/tenure—individual seeks company loyalty, long-term employ-
ment, and financial security.
4. Creativity/entrepreneurship—individual needs to create something on their
own by developing a new product or service, or by building a new business
enterprise.
5. Autonomy—individual looks for situations in which they will be free of orga-
nizational constraints and control.
6. Challenge—individual seeks solving unsolvable problems, overcoming im-
possible obstacles and winning against extremely capable opponents.
7. Service—individual dedicates self to helping other people and contributes to
causes.
8. Geographic security—individuals link themselves to a particular area on a
long-term basis.
9. Life-style integration—individual wants to develop a lifestyle that integrates
family and career concerns.
252 JIANG AND KLEIN
Ginzberg and Baroudi’s second proposition stresses that personnel with dominant
managerial and technical wants will be the most satisfied with a dual-career ladder
that supports both managerial and technical paths within an organization. This con-
clusion assumes that these two orientations are the most prevalent, and that a match
can be made to the satisfaction of the employee. Research supports this proposition in
terms of a match of the career path to the wants of the employee, but finds that over
one-half of the sample population has a dominant orientation that is neither technical
nor managerial; no conclusions could be drawn for this segment [38].
The third proposition is that a match between IS employee wants and the extent to
which these wants are satisfied by the organization is desirable. A closer match should
lead to greater satisfaction and lower turnover. This proposition is not directly ad-
dressed in the literature. However, limited support is found where subjects dominated
by managerial or technical wants are most satisfied in managerial and technical ca-
reers, respectively [38]. IS employees transfer to non-IS positions to pursue new chal-
lenges not available in their old IS career paths, indicating that unfilled wants can
indeed lead to turnover [48].
Motivation Theories
SUBSTANTIAL WORK IN MOTIVATION THEORY lends support to the propositions of
Ginzberg and Baroudi [24]. Scholars have paid a great deal of attention to the idea
that people are motivated to use their jobs as mechanisms for satisfying their needs
[26]. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is among the best-known conceptualizations of
human needs in organizations [44]. His premise is that employees working in an
environment that does not meet their needs are unlikely to function as efficiently or
effectively as possible.
It is well accepted that not all employees are able to satisfy their higher-order needs
on the job [47]. Moreover, there are a varying number of basic needs [55]. Satisfying
employee needs is nevertheless an important step in motivating behavior in the orga-
nization. Importantly, this principle holds in the IS field, as researchers find no sig-
nificant differences in motivational patterns between IS and non-IS professionals [20].
Specific magnitude differences may exist, though driving concerns tend to have more
commonality, especially in terms of the presence of anchors [6, 14, 38].
The greatest value of need theories may lie in the practical implications they have
for management in the form of motivational structures and career planning guidance.
Job design relies on needs theory in that managers can enhance motivation by mak-
ing the jobs people do more appealing. “Job enlargement” (horizontal job loading)
and “job enrichment” (vertical job loading) conceptualize two forms of such prac-
tices [43, 53]. Although enlargement and enrichment tacks are often reported to be
effective, the scientific evidence for their effectiveness is not all that compelling [11].
Employees who are particularly interested in being successful in their lives (that is,
need achievement) work harder at enriched jobs because such jobs provide more
opportunities to achieve success. Employees who are less concerned about achieving
success can find enriched jobs frustrating and actually dissatisfying [21]. In short, job
satisfaction models fail to account for individual differences in needs; different people
prefer different working environments.
Discrepancy Theory and Turnover

DISCREPANCY THEORY RECOGNIZES THE NEED to consider individual differences [42].
It acknowledges that job satisfaction is related to the extent to which job outcomes
(such as rewards) match those desired by the individual. The closer the match—that
is, the more an employee receives what their desires dictate—the higher the job satis-
faction. Large discrepancies or gaps result in more dissatisfaction; small gaps result
in more satisfaction.
The effects of discrepancy (either positive or negative) depend on the specific wants
of the employee. Suppose entrepreneurial opportunity is the employee’s objective job
facet. If entrepreneurial opportunities are not part of a job, many employees will be
dissatisfied. Certain others, though, will be uncomfortable in an organization that stresses
entrepreneurial independence and creativity; they are not satisfied with a positive gap.
Alternatively, suppose job security is the job facet the employee seeks. Employees
receiving less job security than what they want are likely to be dissatisfied through this
negative discrepancy, but additional security will not likely be viewed as a detriment.
There is empirical support for this conclusion. Rice et al. [49] surveyed a group of
general employees on what they wanted and how much they felt their jobs had pro-
vided in terms of pay, hours worked, commuting time, and promotion opportunities.
The aspects of the job for which respondents experienced the greatest discrepancies
were the ones with which they were most dissatisfied; and those for which they expe-
rienced the smallest discrepancies were the ones with which they were most satisfied.
Discrepancy theory has a clear contribution to make to needs theories and job char-
acteristic models: desired aspects are not the same for all people, and satisfaction
varies by individual values and personal perceptions of discrepancies. Discrepancy
theory may help to explain behavior along lines that indicate whether an employee
will remain with the organization. Figure 1 is a schematic of the research model. We
test the following two hypotheses.
H1: The smaller the discrepancy between one’s wants and haves, the higher
one’s career satisfaction.
H2: The smaller the discrepancy between one’s wants and haves, the less press-
ing one’s intent to leave.
Methodology
Data Collection
WE MAILED QUESTIONNAIRES TO 500 randomly selected IS professionals in the United
States, taken from the roster of the American Institute for Technology Professionals
254 JIANG AND KLEIN
Figure 1. Discrepancy Research Model
(AITP). The AITP sample is chosen because members of the AITP represent a wide
variety of organizational settings and have been subjects in IS personnel manage-
ment research [4, 31, 41]. The questionnaires solicited demographic information be-
sides responses to job-related scales. Self-addressed, postage-paid, return envelopes
for each questionnaire were provided to the subjects. All respondents were assured
that their responses would be kept confidential. A total of 98 questionnaires were
returned in the first round for a response rate of 20 percent.
To increase the sample size, duplicate questionnaires were sent to those who did
not respond in the first round. A total of 55 additional questionnaires were received.
As a result, a total of 153 questionnaires were returned, for an overall response rate of
31 percent. To ensure there was no systematic bias between the first-round respon-
dents and the second-round, chi-square tests were undertaken to determine differ-
ences in demographic background between the two groups (such as, gender, age,
work experience, position). No difference was found, so the two groups are com-
bined for further data analysis.
Collectively, respondents include IS department managers, project leaders, system
analysts, programmers, and technical support staffs. The job diversity is appropriate
since all categories experience high turnover and previous studies using the AITP
also found a wide range of IS job titles. Demographic features of the sample popula-
tion appear in Table 1. Table 1 also shows a comparison of common demographics to
those attained in two other studies involving the same target [31, 41]. The demo-
graphics of the population are similar with the others on many variables; with some
difference in age that may be attributed to an aging IS workforce and the time differ-
ence between the samples. To alleviate this concern, age has no significant relation to
any of the independent or dependent variables reported later.
Metrics
The survey examines career satisfaction and intent to leave, two widely used mea-
surements of career-related satisfaction that are important indicators of turnover de-
cisions [27, 31, 33]. Career satisfaction refers to the extent to which an IS employee
Table 1. Sample Demographics
Igbaria and Jiang et al.

This study Baroudi [31] [41]
Position
Top management 3 (2.0%)
Manager/project leader 90 (60.4%) 62.10%
Programmer/system analysts 44 (29.5%) 21.10%
Technical support staff 12 (8.0%)
Years in current organization
1–5 years 66
6–10 years 27
11–15 years 23
16–20 years 19
21–25 years 10
26 or more 5
Years of working experience
1–5 years 10 (6.62%) 5%
6–10 years 9 (5.96%) 9%
11–15 years 19 (12.58%)
16–20 years 32 (21.19%) (11–20) 38%
21–25 years 29 (19.21%) (> 20) 48%
26 or more 51 (33.77%)
Gender
Female 39 (25.83%) 24.20% 25%
Male 112 (74.17%) 75.80% 75%
Age
25–30 4 (2.65%)
31–35 7 (4.64%)
36–40 12 (7.95%) (< 40) 21%
41–45 22 (14.57%)
46–50 22 (14.57%) (40–50) 44%
51–55 55 (36.42%) (> 50) 35%
56–60 20 (13.24%)
61 and over 9 (5.96%)
Education
Graduate 56 (37.09%) 28.30% 50%
Bachelor 63 (41.72%) 40.10% 34%
Associate degree 28 (18.54%) 27.30% 16%
High school 4 (2.65%) 4.30%
expresses a positive attitude toward a career. Intent to leave is defined as the lack of
will an individual has to continue to work in the current organization.
Career satisfaction is negatively related to turnover and measured by a five-item
scale as used in other studies [28, 31, 39]. Respondents were asked to indicate their
agreement or disagreement with each item in Table 2 on a five-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 to 5, strongly disagree to strongly agree. The homogeneity of the
items is then established by computing the internal consistency reliability scores by
applying the formula recommended by Cronbach [15]. Widely used as a measure of
256
Table 2. Career Satisfaction and Intention to Leave Measures
Standard Cronbach
JIANG AND KLEIN
loading t-value* alpha
Career satisfaction 0.84

S1: I am satisfied with the success I have achieved in my career. 0.85 12.32
S2: I am satisfied with the progress I have made toward meeting
my overall career goals. 0.86 12.49
my goals for income. 0.70 9.31
my goals for advancement. 0.83 11.84
my goals for the development of new skills. 0.72 9.66
Intention to leave 0.86
L1: I think a lot about leaving this organization. 0.80 10.89
L2: I am actively searching for an acceptable alternative to this
organization. 0.82 11.25
L3: When I can, I will leave the organization. 0.82 11.26
Note: * Significant at 0.05.
internal consistency, this formula determines a conservative estimate of the reliability

of a scale. The Cronbach alpha for this measure is 0.84.
Intent to leave is positively related to turnover and measured by three items from
Mobley et al. [45]: I think a lot about leaving this organization; I am actively search-
ing for an acceptable alternative to this organization; and when I can, I will leave the
organization. The response options are again from 1 to 5, strongly disagree to strongly
agree; high scores reflect greater intent to leave the organization. Cronbach’s coeffi-
cient of reliability for this measure was 0.86.
A more rigorous test—confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)—is conducted for the
construct that includes career satisfaction and intent to leave. CFA offers an opportu-
nity to examine the reliability and validity of a construct, once it is established that
each scale uniquely measures a dimension. We employ the SAS Institute’s CFA method
of covariance analysis of linear structural equations (CALIS). CALIS can be used for
both path analysis and latent variable modeling. The goodness-of-fit indices include
(1) adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI); (2) root mean square residual (RMR);
(3) Bentler’s comparative fit index (CFI); (4) Bollen’s non-normed fit index (NNFI);
and (5) chi-square value/degree of freedom [7, 10]. The CFA for the career decision
variables indicates a good fit between model and data (AGFI = 0.86, RMR = 0.05,
CFI = 0.96, NNFI = 0.94, chi-square/d.f. = 2.31).
Convergent validity is demonstrated when different instruments are used to measure
the same construct, and scores from the different instruments are strongly correlated.
Empirically, convergent validity can be assessed by reviewing the t-tests for the factor
loadings. If all factor loadings for the indicators measuring the same construct are statis-
tically significant (greater than twice their standard errors), this is evidence supporting
the convergent validity of the indicators [1]. In Table 2, the significance of all parameter
estimates indicates the constructs demonstrate acceptable convergent validity.
Discriminant validity is empirically demonstrated by a confidence interval test [1].
A confidence interval test involves calculating a confidence interval of plus or minus
two standard errors around the correlation between factors, and determining whether
this interval includes 1.0 (or –1.0). If the interval (for each construct) does not in-
clude 1.0, discriminant validity is demonstrated. In this case, the correlation between
intent to leave and career satisfaction is –0.34 with a standard error of –0.08. The
interval is then from –0.50 to –0.18, which does not include the value of –1, demon-
strating discriminant validity.
Career Wants
Career wants are measured by the career orientation inventory (COI). Several IS re-
searchers have used variations of the COI [14, 31, 40, 50]. Whereas variations of the
instrument exist (different orientations are measured), they also have significant over-
lap. To be consistent with previous work, the COI items we use are the same as those
in Igbaria and Baroudi [31]. We retain the same items for further analysis. These
items are shown in Table 3. Respondents indicated the importance of each of the
career items on a five-point scale from 1 (of no importance) to 5 (very important).
258
Table 3. Career Want Measure
Standard Cronbach
JIANG AND KLEIN
F1: Managerial competence 0.77

The process of supervising, influencing, leading, and controlling people at all levels. 0.57 6.27
To be in charge of a whole organization. 0.71 8.24
To rise to a high position in general management. 0.87 10.67
F2: Service 0.82
Using my skills to make the world a better place to live and work in. 0.69 8.02
Being able to use my skills and talents in the service of an important cause. 0.90 11.85
I want a career in which I can be committed and devoted to an important cause. 0.74 9.41
F3: Lifestyle 0.73
Developing a career that permits me to continue to pursue my own lifestyle. 0.70 8.15
A career is worthwhile only if it enables me to lead my life in my own way. 0.77 9.19
Choosing and maintaining a certain lifestyle is more important than career success. 0.63 8.30
F4: Geographic security 0.84
Remaining in one geographic area rather than moving because of a promotion. 0.94 11.57
It is more important for me to remain in my present geographic location than to receive
a promotion or new job assignment in another location. 0.78 9.52
F5: Technical competence 0.67
Remaining in my specialized area as opposed to being promoted out of my area of expertise. 0.70 8.16
Remaining in my area of expertise throughout my career. 0.73 8.42
I will accept a management position only if it is in my area of expertise. 0.49 5.14
F6: Challenge 0.71

Working on problems that are almost insoluble. 0.73 8.41
The only real challenge in my career has been confronting and solving tough problems,
no matter what area they are in. 0.60 6.64
I feel successful only if I am constantly challenged by a tough problem or a competitive
situation. 0.69 7.79
F7: Entrepreneur 0.86
Building a new business enterprise. 0.72 8.30
I am always on the lookout for ideas that would permit me to start and build my own
enterprise. 0.89 12.64
I have always wanted to start and build up a business of my own. 0.86 11.98
F8: Job security 0.78
An employer who will provide security through guaranteed work, benefits, and a
good retirement program. 0.72 8.31
An organization that will give me long-run stability. 0.91 11.38
F9: Autonomy 0.68
The chance to do things my own way and not to be constrained by the rules of an
A career that is free from organizational restrictions. 0.62 6.92
I do not want to be constrained by either an organization or the business world. 0.72 8.30
Note: * Significant at p < 0.05 level.
A DISCREPANCY MODEL OF INFORMATION SYSTEM PERSONNEL TURNOVER
259
260 JIANG AND KLEIN
A confirmatory factor analysis is performed for the internal career anchor measure-
ment model. Fit indices show a reasonable fit with AGFI = 0.75, RMR = 0.09, CFI =
0.85, NNFI = 0.87, and chi-square/d.f. = 1.77. The Cronbach alpha values are similar
to those in the study of Igbaria and Baroudi [31] and acceptable for social science
studies [46]. All t-tests on the factor loadings are significant, indicating convergent
validity. Discriminant validity is empirically demonstrated by confidence interval
tests. None of the intervals include 1.0, as shown in Table 4, so discriminant validity
is demonstrated. The above tests provide strong support for the reliability and valid-
ity of the COI construct.
Perceived Career Haves
The use of similar questions on the “want” and “have” dimensions in discrepancy
studies is highly recommended [12, 49]. We measure the extent of the career oppor-
tunities that respondents perceive available in their organizations using items identi-
cal to those we use to measure internal career wants. Here we ask not how much they
want along a certain career dimension but rather how much of the attribute they were
experiencing. A five-point Likert scale is used to assess the degree of opportunities
provided by the organization from 1 to 5, no opportunity to great opportunity. Table
5 shows the items and loading results for this measure.
A CFA is again conducted to examine the reliability and validity of this measure-
ment “have” dimension. The results show a good fit (AGFI = 0.80, RMR = 0.05,
CFI = 0.93, NNFI = 0.92, and chi-square/d.f. = 1.45). The Cronbach reliability for
each dimension is acceptable and similar to those for the want dimension. Conver-
gent validity is demonstrated since all t-tests were significant for each construct. Dis-
criminant validity is tested in identical fashion to the “want” measure and is supported.
In summary, the series of tests provides strong support for the reliability and validity
of the career haves.
External Validity Issues

External validity refers to the extent to which findings can be generalized across
times, persons, and settings [13]. The external validity of findings would be threat-
ened if the sample itself were systematically biased—for example, if the responses
are obtained largely from relatively satisfied or unsatisfied IS employees. The mean
of career satisfaction is 3.67, with a median of 4.00, skewness of –0.51, and kurtosis
of 0.21. The responses show good distribution on career satisfaction because the mean
and median are similar, skewness is less than two, and kurtosis is less than five [23].
Overall, career satisfaction-related bias appears unlikely. Similarly, intent to leave
shows no evidence of any pattern of bias.
Additional threats to external validity could occur if the sample were to show
other systematic biases in terms of demographics. We conduct an analysis of vari-
ance (ANOVA) by using career satisfaction (as the dependent variable) against each
demographic characteristic in Table 1 (independent variables). Results do not indi-
Table 4. Discriminant Validity Confidence Interval Test for Career Want
Standard Lower Higher

Dimensions Estimate error bound bound
F1–F2 0.11 0.10 –0.09 0.31

F1–F3 0.10 0.12 –0.14 0.34
F1–F4 0.35 0.10 0.15 0.55
F1–F5 0.44 0.09 0.26 0.62
F1–F6 0.02 0.11 –0.20 0.24
F1–F7 0.26 0.11 0.04 0.48
F1–F8 0.10 0.11 –0.12 0.32
F1–F9 0.04 0.10 –0.16 0.24

F2–F3 0.04 0.11 –0.18 0.26
F2–F4 0.21 0.09 0.03 0.39
F2–F5 0.15 0.09 –0.03 0.33
F2–F6 0.26 0.09 0.08 0.44
F2–F7 0.27 0.10 0.07 0.47
F2–F8 0.09 0.11 –0.13 0.31
F2–F9 0.31 0.09 0.13 0.49
F3–F4 0.05 0.11 –0.17 0.26
F3–F5 0.19 0.10 –0.01 0.39
F3–F6 0.08 0.11 –0.14 0.30
F3–F7 0.38 0.11 0.16 0.60
F3–F8 0.56 0.09 0.38 0.74
F3–F9 0.43 0.09 0.25 0.61
F4–F5 0.35 0.08 0.19 0.51
F4–F6 0.26 0.09 0.08 0.44
F4–F7 0.25 0.10 0.05 0.45
F4–F8 0.08 0.10 –0.12 0.28
F4–F9 0 0.09 –0.18 0.18
F5–F6 0.05 0.09 –0.13 0.23
F5–F7 0.11 0.10 –0.09 0.31
F5–F8 0.34 0.09 0.16 0.52
F5–F9 0.01 0.09 –0.17 0.19
F6–F7 0.26 0.10 0.06 0.46
F6–F8 0.05 0.10 –0.15 0.25
F6–F9 0.08 0.09 –0.10 0.26
F7–F8 0 0.11 –0.22 0.22
F7–F9 0.11 0.10 –0.09 0.31
F8–F9 0.14 0.10 0.06 0.34
cate any significant relationship between career satisfaction and any demographic
variable except gender. Similar results hold for organizational commitment and in-
tent to leave as the dependent variables. These results are consistent with the litera-
ture—an employee’s gender has a slight effect on IS employees’ career decisions [4,
32]. (Gender is considered in further analyses described later.) None of these tests
reveal significant threats to external validity. In addition, the vector of the internal
anchors from this study to another have a Spearman’s rank correlation of 0.88, at a
262
Table 5. Career Have Measure
Standard Cronbach
JIANG AND KLEIN
Managerial competence 0.77

The process of supervising, influencing, leading, and controlling people at all levels. 0.60 7.21
To be in charge of a whole organization. 0.75 9.53
To rise to a high position in general management. 0.82 10.80
Service 0.80
Using my skills to make the world a better place to live and work in. 0.76 10.07
Being able to use my skills and talents in the service of an important cause. 0.85 11.80
I want a career in which I can be committed and devoted to an important cause. 0.70 8.99
Lifestyle 0.79
Developing a career that permits me to continue to pursue my own lifestyle. 0.80 10.69
A career is worthwhile only if it enables me to lead my life in my own way. 0.80 10.53
Choosing and maintaining a certain lifestyle is more important than career success. 0.69 8.65
Geographic security 0.67
Remaining in one geographic area rather than moving because of a promotion. 0.65 7.52
It is more important for me to remain in my present geographic location than to receive a
promotion or new job assignment in another location. 0.72 8.27
Technical competence 0.60
Remaining in my specialized area as opposed to being promoted out of my area of expertise. 0.59 6.82
Remaining in my area of expertise throughout my career. 0.78 9.41
I will accept a management position only if it is in my area of expertise. 0.51 5.14
Challenge 0.74
Working on problems that are almost insoluble. 0.63 7.62
The only real challenge in my career has been confronting and solving tough problems,
no matter what area they are in. 0.80 10.33
I feel successful only if I am constantly challenged by a tough problem or a competitive
situation. 0.64 7.69
Entrepreneur 0.83
Building a new business enterprise. 0.85 11.63
I am always on the lookout for ideas that would permit me to start and build my own
enterprise. 0.79 10.54
I have always wanted to start and build up a business of my own. 0.75 9.69
Job security 0.75
An employer who will provide security through guaranteed work, benefits, and a good
retirement program. 0.66 7.99
An organization that will give me long-run stability. 0.92 11.39
Autonomy 0.64
The chance to do things my own way and not to be constrained by the rules of an
A career that is free from organizational restrictions. 0.63 7.31
I do not want to be constrained by either an organization or the business world. 0.62 7.21
A DISCREPANCY MODEL OF INFORMATION SYSTEM PERSONNEL TURNOVER
263
264 JIANG AND KLEIN
significance of 0.001 [31]. This enhances the generalizability of the findings to the
population of IS employees.
Statistical Testing Methods for Discrepancies

In testing the hypotheses pertaining to “have–want” discrepancies, a multistep mod-
erated regression should be employed [8, 9, 17, 49]. The moderated regression is
appropriate because it first examines the impact of variables known to explain some
of the variance, then determines if the addition of further independent variables or
interactive effects add significantly to the explanatory model. In our case, previous
studies have found the internal anchors and external anchors to have a relation to the
predictors of turnover. In addition, gender is found related to the dependent variables
and will therefore be included as a moderator. These variables will appear in our
model at the first step. Successive steps are used to determine if additional relations
significantly explain additional variance. In the case of discrepancy, interactive terms
are a possible cause of concern as can be seen through common distance measures
employed in scoring differences.
Mahalanobis’s D is a common generalized distance measure used in difference
estimation and is represented as D = [S(Xi – Yi )2]1/2. Extending the product results in
D = [S(Xi2 + Yi2 – 2XiYi )]1/2. As can be seen, D breaks down into two “main effects” (X
and Y) and a function of the cross-product (XY) of the variables. This interaction term
can be problematic in difference scores. Cronbach [16] suggests entering component
terms of the difference measure and their interaction terms in separate steps into a
regression equation and examining their contributions to prediction of the dependent
variables. Berger-Gross [8] shows that the final R2 is essentially identical in Cronbach’s
technique and Mahalanobis’s measure of difference, D. What this means is that the
interaction terms must be examined in a further step of moderated regression to ex-
plain any possible effects due to the computation of a difference.
In our analysis, career satisfaction and intent to leave are the dependent variables.
At the first step of the analysis, the predictor variables are gender, want, and have
measures. Thus, the first step of the regression analysis demonstrates additive dis-
crepancy effects associated with the standard of comparison. At this step, discrep-
ancy theory predicts that the regression coefficient will be negative for the want amount
and positive for the have amount. Such a result indicates that higher want amounts
result in less satisfaction, if the actual degree of that characteristic in the workplace is
held constant and that higher have amounts result in higher satisfaction, if the actual
wanted amount is constant. (The opposite pattern of results would be expected for
negatively valued dependent variables, that is, intent to leave.)
At the second step of the analysis, the predictor variable is a cross-product score
created by multiplying each subject’s scores for want amount and have amount. The
have–want interaction is entered into a hierarchical regression equation that already
contains want and have amounts as predictors. A test on the contribution to R2 is made
to determine whether the higher-order term in the moderated regression contributes to
prediction beyond that of the ordinary linear regression equation (without the addi-
Table 6. Gaps Between Career Want and Have
Career Career Gap Absolute

Dimensions want have (have–want) gap
Managerial competence 3.63 3.30 –0.33* 0.78*

Service 3.20 3.09 –0.11 0.97*
Lifestyle 3.62 3.03 –0.60* 0.87*
Geographic security 3.56 3.63 0.07 0.95*
Technical competence 2.87 3.12 0.25* 0.93*
Challenge 3.07 3.10 0.03 0.62*
Entrepreneur 2.47 2.31 –0.15 0.97*
Job security 4.04 3.67 –0.38* 0.83*

Autonomy 3.06 2.74 –0.31* 0.88*
tional higher-order term). A significant want–have interaction indicates that the ef-
fects on career satisfaction depend on more complex relations.
The discrepancy hypotheses we propose will be supported if the first-step regres-
sion results are confirmed (that is, there is an additive discrepancy effect). The second
step is whether there is a nonadditive discrepancy effect in this career want-and-have
comparison process that could indicate nonlinearities, or possible bias. Interactions
are typically examined graphically to determine if any patterns emerge [35, 49].
Results of Statistical Analysis

THE MEANS OF THE CAREER WANTS, CAREER HAVES , and the gaps are presented in
Table 6. Gaps are shown both as average and absolute differences. A negative value
for average difference means that the subjects perceive they have less than they want.
The absolute gap takes the average of the absolute values for each difference. The
absolute gap represents a difference between the have and the want values, regardless
of direction. Only when a deviation in either direction leads to lower satisfaction (or
more pronounced intent to leave) would this measure be important. The tests for
significance (marked by an asterisk) are a paired t-test for the gap and a t-test for
greater than zero on the absolute gap. In just three of the nine wants, respondents felt
they do have what they want.
To examine the additive discrepancy effect, we conduct nine separate moderated
regression analyses for each career decision variable. The addition of the have and
want variables adds significantly to the amount of explained variance when, solely,
gender is employed. External career haves and internal career wants are the predic-
tors examined in the first step of the regression analysis. The coefficients for the
variables are shown in Table 7. The directions of the coefficients on the gender vari-
ables indicate higher career satisfaction and less intent to leave for all want factors,
although identical signs on the significant coefficients for the want and have vari-
ables are attained when gender is not included in the model.
266 JIANG AND KLEIN
Table 7. Regression Results of Turnover Indicators with Career Want and

Career Have
Dependent Independent Career Career

variable variable want have Gender
Career Managerial competence –0.04 +0.28 0.22

satisfaction Service –0.05 +0.27 0.26
Lifestyle –0.02 +0.24 0.29
Geographic security +0.05 +0.22 0.21
Technical competence –0.00 +0.22 0.30
Challenge –0.05 +0.31 0.17

Entrepreneur* –0.24 +0.16 0.15
Job security +0.03 +0.29 0.15
Autonomy –0.21 +0.16 0.20
Intent to leave Managerial competence +0.22 –0.48 –0.19
Service +0.18 –0.32 –0.13
Lifestyle +0.38 –0.51 –0.29
Geographic security –0.03 –0.22 –0.19
Technical competence +0.03 –0.18 –0.26
Challenge +0.09 –0.30 –0.13
Entrepreneur* +0.24 –0.32 –0.09
Job security +0.10 –0.38 –0.10
Autonomy +0.39 –0.31 –0.08
Note: * Interaction term adds significantly to R2.
To support an additive discrepancy effect, the regression coefficients for wants should
be negative and the regression coefficients for haves should be positive (the converse
would be true for intent to leave). To test each hypothesis, we use the number of signs
in the expected direction in a binomial test (equivalent to a sign test). The probability
that the pattern is random is less than 0.0006, meeting a requirement of a £ 0.05 to
support both hypotheses. Using the binomial distribution, the power of the test is 0.89.
Only the entrepreneurship factor is significantly affected by the interaction of want
and have. Figure 2 is drawn to show the interaction relation following similar analyses
[49]. The sample is divided into those having little want for entrepreneurship and those
having a high want. Those higher than one deviation from the mean want are consid-
ered high-want employees and those less than one standard deviation from the mean
are considered low-want employees. The want variable is used as the variable for divi-
sion because discrepancy theory considers wants to be the anchor of the relation.
Both divisions of the sample reduced intent to leave as the amount of entrepreneur-
ship they perceive they have increases, although the slopes differ in magnitude. Simi-
larly, both divisions of the sample have increased career satisfaction as the amount of
entrepreneurship they perceive they have increases, although the slopes again differ.
Thus, even though the interaction effects are significant for entrepreneurship, there
do not appear to be many subjects who have an aversion to having more of the entre-
preneurship factor than they want.
a
Figure 2. Interaction of Career Want and Career Have for Entrepreneurship
Discussion of Results
THE CONTRIBUTION OF THIS STUDY is to provide theory and empirical results to ex-
plain important relations in the formation of turnover indicators for IS professionals.
Discrepancy theory provides a method to link the turnover indicator variables of
intent to leave and career satisfaction to variables that reflect a gap between wants of
employees and their perceptions of what they have in their jobs. The data show that to
improve the turnover indicators, IS managers and human resource managers must
find ways to close the gap between employee wants and what they perceive they have
in their current positions.
It is our confirmation of the gap that extends this work beyond previous studies.
Other researchers have found that certain wants are significantly correlated with ca-
reer satisfaction, but “the relationships are quite small (the largest correlation was
0.21) and probably have little practical significance” [31, p. 149]. Another study finds
no significant relationships between wants and career satisfaction in five out of eight
correlations [3]. Although we too find degrees of want are not good predictors, when
they are used as anchors to measure against what IS personnel perceive they have, all
nine dimensions of job facets become significant. This is a strong indicator that a
268 JIANG AND KLEIN
multifaceted approach to employee career planning may be crucial in the reduction

of turnover.
Our results indicate that managers need to pay careful attention to several aspects
of employee wants. The data find significant differences in an adverse direction for
managerial, autonomy, job security, and lifestyle wants. The dual-career ladder is a
direct response to managerial or technical employee wants [24]. The desire for au-
tonomy indicates employees look for chances to demonstrate and apply their unique
skills [52]. Downsizing of staff has created anxieties detrimental to feelings of job
security [41]. Lifestyle integration need among IS employees is found in many cases
[25]. Management conceptualization of employee career plans should take all of these
into account to reduce turnover, although the exact mix cannot be determined from
existing data.
The only significant discrepancy in a favorable direction is for technical compe-
tence. This seems counterintuitive as researchers have argued that IS professionals
look for technical challenges to meet growth needs [19]. Trade journals are filled
with anecdotes of people leaving one job for another to gain access to the most recent
technologies. This result may be due to an aging workforce that has other wants due
to changes in their personal lives or by advancing through career stages [18]. This
lack may be due to the other end of the spectrum, those who have entered the IS
workforce due to the lucrative positions rather than a love of technology. It may be
due to an inability to keep up with all of the changes in technology. Regardless, even
the discrepancies in this direction can be important to human resource managers when
seeking trade-offs in developing a career plan.
Career planning activities present an approach that management may use to close
the gaps by coaching employees through self-assessment and goal setting [54]. Ca-
reer planning increases employee awareness of themselves and their career goals by
providing realistic job previews and attention to alignment of their goals to organiza-
tional opportunities. Specific activities include career counseling and mentoring by
supervisors, individual self-assessments, and the setting of career objectives. Spe-
cific programs can be put in place that encourage the assessment by the individuals
and the sharing of the information with mentors and counselors. Skill assessment,
already practiced by many, can also be a useful tool in matching career interest to
specific functions within the organization.
Both the individual and the organization must assume shared responsibility for
planning careers for an employee within the organization. Relevant information should
be shared at all times regarding factors that can impact one’s status. Assignment of
joint responsibility of career management adds importance to the task of managing
the career. Programs need to be built that provide valuable feedback to the employee
as well as the organization. Frequent monitoring will highlight deviations from plans
or changes in life that may alter the employees’ views. Organizations need to be flex-
ible enough to have multiple career paths and permit employees different paths through
the positions and functions available. Training for subsequent transitions must be done
in a timely manner and taken seriously by the employee. Each of these activities
has the potential to reduce any gaps by identifying the gaps and modifying the envi-
ronment to close them or training the employee to serve other functions in line with
mutual interests.
We acknowledge the limitations of this study, mainly with regard to the sample and
sampling procedure. A single professional organization may not be representative of
the population of information system personnel. Respondents hold a variety of job
titles, as reported in Table 1, and certain career wants vary by job title [29]. Thus,
drawing specific conclusions about a particular job category from these more general
observations would be risky. Another limitation relates to the time factor. Career wants
are expected to change over time and over the career life cycle of an individual [18].
Similar to career stage considerations, previous studies have found that age is signifi-
cantly related to certain anchors [31]. The aging population of the IS community, as
shown by the age differences in the studies compared in Table 1, may result in changes
to the dominant anchors, further complicating any conclusions. Other factors in the
population not studied may exist that could require further anchors, such as the de-
mands of two-career families. Moreover, any specific wants will evolve as the economy
evolves. The sample was taken during boom times, perhaps resulting in different
dominant anchors than may exist in the current downturn. Still, these limitations have
more impact on specific anchors rather than on the discrepancy model examined.
Development of a better understanding of certain turnover dynamics of IS person-
nel leads to more questions for future research. Besides differences by job title, dif-
ferent IS employees working in the same IS unit and conducting similar tasks are
likely to have different wants. We would benefit from empirical research that exam-
ines the career opportunities provided by various kind of IS positions and jobs as well
as the types of desires satisfied by each opportunity. Matching opportunities to an
individual is paramount to success.
Our results also do not provide an indication of how many wants need to be satis-
fied for each employee, which in turn is likely to vary by individual. Future discrep-
ancy studies investigating the importance of various wants should consider variables
that complement those represented by Schein’s COI. These would include percep-
tions of equitable treatment [19], role ambiguity and conflict [2], rewards and profes-
sionalism [5], and career-related variables [33].
Dalton et al. [18] argue that an individual’s career development evolves over time
and career stages. The effects of external career opportunities may similarly differ for
individuals at different career stages. Some researchers argue that individuals who
have other interests as their central life focus (such as family), will be less influenced
by their wants [24]. As employees age, central life interests may shift from work to
other parts of their lives. Thus, except for a particular group of employees, we may
not be able to identify the most important external career opportunity factors (or
other motivations) that influence career decisions. Moreover, though proven to be
very reliable in the past, no one claims that all anchors have been identified. In fact,
changing social conditions, job requirements, and the face of commerce itself may
alter the structure of the internal anchors through addition, deletion, or modification.
It would be helpful for research to examine ways to satisfy the specific wants of IS
personnel. This will be essential for managers to understand differences in order to
270 JIANG AND KLEIN
develop individualized career plans. Ginzberg and Baroudi [24] suggest that consid-
erations other than job title or gender may come into play. Differences could be re-
lated to geographic area, the presence of communities of practice, dual-career families,
and demographics not identified so far. Career-planning activities will not be suc-
cessful without both an understanding of the general issue and a meaningful way to
determine the specific needs and need levels of an employee.
The development of techniques to determine specific needs should be a top priority
for researchers in IS personnel management. We know many large organizations be-
lieve that employee attitude-related surveys can be useful in addressing issues related
to communication, motivation, effectiveness of supervisors, and career decisions [22].
Employee attitudes are clearly an issue in IS employees’ career decisions. The COI
measure is one possibility through which managers may better understand IS em-
ployees’ career needs and thereby reduce employee turnover.
REFERENCES
1. Anderson, J.C., and Gerbing, D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review
and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 3 (May 1988), 411–423.
2. Baroudi, J.J. The impact of role variables on IS personnel work attitudes and intentions.
MIS Quarterly, 9, 4 (December 1985), 341–356.
3. Baroudi, J.J. The career needs of IS personnel: Does the dual career ladder work? In R.H.
Sprague Jr. (ed.), Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Hawaii International Conference on
Systems Science, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1988, pp. 171–180.
4. Baroudi, J.J., and Igbaria, M. An examination of gender effects on career success of
information systems employees. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11, 3 (Winter
1995–1996), 181–201.
5. Bartol, K.M. Turnover among DP personnel: A causal analysis. Communications of the
ACM, 26, 10 (October 1983), 807–811.
6. Bartol, K.M., and Martin, D. Managing information systems personnel: A review of the
literature and managerial implications. MIS Quarterly, 6, 1 (1982), 49–70.
7. Bentler, P.M. EOS: Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statis-
tical Software, 1989.
8. Berger-Gross, V. Difference score measures of social perceptions revisited: A compari-
son of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29, 2 (April 1982),
279–285.
9. Berger-Gross, V., and Kraut, A. L. Great expectations: A no-conflict explanation of role
conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 2 (May 1984), 261–271.
10. Bollen, K.A. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1989.
11. Campion, M.A., and McClelland, C.L. Interdisciplinary examination of the costs and
benefits of enlarged jobs: A job design quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 2
(April 1991), 186–198.
12. Cohen, J., and Cohen, P. Applied Multivariate Regression/Correlation Analysis in the
Behavioral Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1983.
13. Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T. Quasi-Experimentation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1979.
14. Crepeau, R.G.; Crook, C.W.; Goslar, M.D.; and McMurtrey, M.E. Career anchors of
information systems personnel. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9, 2 (Fall 1992),
145–160.
15. Cronbach, L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 3
(1951), 297–334.
16. Cronbach, L.J. Proposals leading to analytical treatment of social perception scores. In
R. Ragiuri and L. Petrullo (eds.), Person Perception and Interpersonal Behavior. Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 1958.
17. Cronbach, L.J., and Furby, L. How should we measure change, or should we? Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 74, 1 (1970), 68–80.
18. Dalton, G.W.; Thompson, P.H.; and Rice, R.L. The four stages of professional careers—
A new look at performance by professionals. Organizational Dynamics, 6, 1 (Summer 1977),
19–42.
19. Dittrich, J.E.; Couger, J.D.; and Zawacki, R.A. Perceptions of equity, job satisfaction
and intention to quit among data processing personnel. Information & Management, 8, 2 (Sep-
tember 1985), 67–75.
20. Ferratt, T.W., and Short, L.E. Are information systems people different? An investigation
of motivational differences. MIS Quarterly, 10, 4 (December 1986), 377–386.
21. Fried, Y., and Ferris, G.R. The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and
meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 2 (Summer 1987), 287–322.
22. Gallup, G. Employee research: From nice to know to need to know. Personnel Journal,
67, 8 (August 1988), 42–43.
23. Ghiselli, E.E.; Campbell, J.P.; and Zedeck, J.P. Measurement Theory for the Behavioral
Sciences. San Francisco: Freeman, 1981.
24. Ginzberg, M.J., and Baroudi, J.J. MIS careers—A theoretical perspective. Communica-
tions of the ACM, 31, 5 (May 1988), 586–594.
25. Ginzberg, M.J., and Baroudi, J.J. Career orientations of IS personnel. In A.L. Lederer
(ed.), Proceedings of the 1992 ACM SIGCPR Conference. New York: ACM Press, 1992, pp.
41–55.
26. Greenberg, J., and Baron, R.A. Behavior in Organizations, 4th ed. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1993.
27. Greenhaus, J.H. Career Management. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press, 1987.
28. Greenhaus, J.H.; Parasuraman, S.; and Wormley, W.M. Effects of race on organizational
experience, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Jour-
nal, 33, 1 (March 1990), 64–86.
29. Guimaraes, T., and Igbaria, M. The determinants of turnover intentions: Comparing IC
and IS personnel. Information Systems Research, 3, 3 (September 1992), 273–303.
30. Hayes, F. Labor storage is real. ComputerWorld, 32, 5 (February 2, 1998), 8.
31. Igbaria, M., and Baroudi, J.J. A short form measure of career orientations: A psychomet-
ric evaluation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10, 2 (Fall 1993), 131–154.
32. Igbaria, M., and Baroudi, J.J. The impact of job performance evaluations on career ad-
vancement prospects: An examination of gender differences in the IS workplace. MIS Quar-
terly, 19, 1 (March 1995), 107–123.
33. Igbaria, M., and Greenhaus, J.H. Determinants of MIS employees’turnover intentions: A
structural equation model. Communications of the ACM, 35, 2 (February 1992), 34–49.
34. Igbaria, M., and Greenhaus, J.H. The career advancement prospects of managers and
professionals: Are MIS employees unique? Decision Sciences, 23, 2 (March–April 1992),
478–499.
35. Igbaria, M., and Guimaraes, T. Antecedents and consequences of job satisfaction among
information center employees. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9, 4 (Spring 1993),
145–174.
36. Igbaria, M., and Guimaraes, T. Exploring differences in employee turnover intentions
and its determinants among telecommuters and non-telecommuters. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 16, 1 (Summer 1999), 147–164.
37. Igbaria, M., and Siegel, S.R. The career decision of information systems people. Infor-
mation & Management, 24, 1 (January 1993), 23–32.
38. Igbaria, M.; Greenhaus, J.H.; and Parasuraman, S. Career orientations of MIS employ-
ees: An empirical analysis. MIS Quarterly, 15, 2 (June 1991), 151–169.
39. Jiang, J., and Klein, G. Supervisor support and career anchor impact on the career satis-
faction of the entry-level information systems professional. Journal of Management Informa-
tion Systems, 16, 3 (Winter 1999–2000), 219–240.
272 JIANG AND KLEIN
40. Jiang, J.; Klein, G.; and Balloun, J. The diverse career orientations of MIS personnel.
Computer Personnel, 17, 4 (October 1995), 3–16.
41. Jiang, J.; Margulis, S.; and Klein, G. IS downsizing survivors’ career management atti-
tudes. Computer Personnel, 19, 3 (July 1997), 3–15.
42. Locke, E.A. The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In E. Dunnett (ed.), Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976, pp. 1297–1350.
43. Maidani, E.A. Comparative study of Herzberg’s two-factor theory of job satisfaction
among public and private sectors. Public Personnel Management, 20, 4 (Winter 1991), 441–448.
44. Maslow, A.H. Motivation and Personality, 2d ed. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
45. Mobley, W.H.; Horner, S.O.; and Hollingsworth, A.T. An evaluation of the precursors of
hospital employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 4 (August 1978), 408–414.
46. Peterson, R.A. A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer
Research, 21, 2 (September 1994), 381–391.
47. Porter, L.W. A study of perceived need satisfaction in bottom and middle management
jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 45, 1 (1961), 1–10.
48. Reich, B.H., and Kaarst-Brown, M.L. Seeding the line: Understanding the transition
from IT to non-IT careers. MIS Quarterly, 23, 3 (September 1999), 337–364.
49. Rice, R.W.; McFarlin, D.B.; and Bennett, D.E. Standards of comparison and job satis-
faction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 4 (August 1989), 591–598.
50. Schein, E.H. Career Anchors: Discovering Your Real Values. San Diego, CA: University
Associates, 1985.
51. Sherman, A.W., and Bohlander, G.W. Managing Human Resources, 9th ed. Cincinnati,
OH: South-Western Publishing, 1992.
52. Smits, S.J.; McLean, E.R.; and Tanner, J.R. Managing high-achieving information sys-
tems professionals. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9, 4 (Spring 1993), 103–120.
53. Steers, R.M., and Porter, L.W. (eds.) Motivation and Work Behavior, 5th ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1989.
54. Van Maanen, J., and Schein, E.H. Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In B.
Staw (ed.), Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1979, pp. 209–264.
55. Wahba, M.A., and Bridwell, L.G. Maslow reconsidered: A review of research on the
need hierarchy theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15, 2 (April 1976),
212–240.

A Discrepancy Model of Information System Personnel Turnover 2002 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Discrepancy Model of Information System Personnel Turnover 2002 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Ecole Hautes Etudes Commer-

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045722

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

JAMES J. JIANG is a professor of Management Information Systems at the University

GARY KLEIN is the Couger Professor of Information Systems at the University of

ABSTRACT: Turnover of information system (IS) personnel is a critical problem for

A CONTINUING CHALLENGE IN MANAGING information systems (IS) personnel is the

been tied to failed systems projects and inadequate deployment of an organization’s

Career Orientation and Turnover

1. Managerial competence—individual pursues greater responsibility for accom-

Discrepancy Theory and Turnover

Figure 1. Discrepancy Research Model

Table 1. Sample Demographics

Igbaria and Jiang et al.

Table 2. Career Satisfaction and Intention to Leave Measures

loading t-value* alpha

Career satisfaction 0.84

internal consistency, this formula determines a conservative estimate of the reliability

Table 3. Career Want Measure

F1: Managerial competence 0.77

F6: Challenge 0.71

Perceived Career Haves

External Validity Issues

Table 4. Discriminant Validity Confidence Interval Test for Career Want

Standard Lower Higher

F1–F2 0.11 0.10 –0.09 0.31

F1–F9 0.04 0.10 –0.16 0.24

Table 5. Career Have Measure

Managerial competence 0.77

Statistical Testing Methods for Discrepancies

Table 6. Gaps Between Career Want and Have

Career Career Gap Absolute

Managerial competence 3.63 3.30 –0.33* 0.78*

Job security 4.04 3.67 –0.38* 0.83*

Results of Statistical Analysis

Table 7. Regression Results of Turnover Indicators with Career Want and

Dependent Independent Career Career

Career Managerial competence –0.04 +0.28 0.22

Challenge –0.05 +0.31 0.17

Figure 2. Interaction of Career Want and Career Have for Entrepreneurship

multifaceted approach to employee career planning may be crucial in the reduction

You might also like