Actual voluntary turnover: A study of job embeddedness, pay satisfaction, and perceived alternative job opportunities

Past literature supports negative links between job embeddedness, pay satisfaction and actual voluntary turnover (AVT), several meta-analytical studies have reported weaker links between these constructs. As a result, calls for further research has been suggested, particularly on the interactive process through which both job embeddedness and pay satisfaction are likely to influence AVT. The purpose of this study was also to explore the likely interactive effect of perceived alternative job opportunities on job embeddedness, pay satisfaction, and AVT. A mixed-method approach was used. Data were obtained from a survey sample of 216 and nine interviewed former faculty members of public universities in Nigeria. Using partial least square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM), the quantitative results indicated that both organizational embeddedness and pay satisfaction were significantly and negatively related to AVT. On the contrary, community embeddedness demonstrated no significant effect on AVT. The results further showed that perceived alternative job opportunities moderated the relationship between organizational embeddedness and AVT, as well as between pay satisfaction and AVT. But, no significant interaction effect was found between perceived alternative job opportunities and community embeddedness. In addition to the survey, semi-structured interviews were conducted. The results of the interviews showed that the dysfunctional nature of the university’s work environment and longer commute time were important contributors to their reason for leaving. The qualitative result also revealed that the disparity in pay between public and private universities played a critical role in the participants’ decisions to actually leave. Additionally, unsolicited job offer was also identified as another reason that influenced their turnover decisions. Overall, the qualitative results complemented the survey findings in that they were able to further clarify and elaborate the latter. Implications of the results for future research and practice, as well as the limitations of the study are highlighted

Advisor Loss in Counseling Psychology Doctoral Students: A Qualitative Perspective

The advisory relationship is a critical component of training in counseling psychology doctoral programs (Gelso, 1979; Gelso & Lent, 2000; Schlosser & Gelso, 2001). The doctoral advisor performs various functions and is theorized to serve as a secure base from which the advisee can safely explore (Huber, Sauer, Mrdjenovich, & Gugiu, 2010). Research indicates that faculty mobility has become increasingly common and is often a component of professional advancement, resulting in high turnover rates and subsequent advisor loss (Aggarwal & Medury, 2012). The present study aimed to be the first to examine how advisees experience this loss. Utilizing Consensual Qualitative Research (Hill et al., 2005), the present study consisted of interviews with 10 counseling psychology doctoral advisees who had experienced the loss of their advisor during doctoral training. The seven domains that emerged from the data were: (1) relationship with original advisor prior to departure; (2) experience of advisor loss; (3) responses to advisor loss (self and others); (4) transition to new advisor; (5) relationship with new advisor; (6) current relationship with original advisor; and (7) views of advising relationship. Results indicated that although a majority of advisees described the initial experience of advisor loss negatively, numerous advisees adapted and made positive meaning of the experience. Experiences after the loss were important in advisees’ ability to make meaning and in the loss’s perceived impact on graduate training. Faculty and programmatic responses, research, professional development tasks, relationship with the new advisor, and navigation of the doctoral program were key areas discussed as either positively or negatively connected to the experience of advisor loss. Implications for doctoral programs are discussed, including how programs can appropriately respond when advisor loss occurs (e.g., ensuring faculty members meet with students who have lost an advisor) and how to address this issue in program materials (e.g., a statement in the student handbook about who will follow up with the student after the loss occurs, the timeline in which this communication will take place, who the student can contact with any questions or concerns, and specific information on how a student should go about identifying a new advisor to work with, so as to help students gain a sense of control by knowing what steps would be taken if loss was to occur). Limitations and directions for future research are also discussed