Which way of learning benefits your career? The role of different forms of work-related learning for different types of perceived employability

Figures & data

Table 1. Overview of four employability types.

	Quantitative	Qualitative
Internal	I could easily find another job in my company.	I could easily find a better job in my company.
External	I could easily find another job outside my company.	I could easily find a better job outside my company.

Note. Typology based on De Cuyper and De Witte (2011), p. 155.

Figure 1. Conceptual Model of the Relationships Between Work-related Learning and Employability.

Note. H = Hypothesis. H1, H2, and H3 refer to the impact of work-related learning on employability. H4 and H5 refer to the expected differences in the strength of these associations, meaning that the larger the font size of the respective work-related learning construct, the larger the effect.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics and correlations among time 1 variables (beneath the diagonal) and time 2 variables (above the diagonal).

	Variable	M t1	M t2	SD t1	SD t2	Skew t1	Skew t2	Kurtosis t1	Kurtosis t2	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1	Informal learning	4.35	4.35	0.55	0.59	−0.25	−0.05	0.07	0.00	.88/.90	.19***	.50***	.19***	.22***	.10	.27***	.04	−.04	−.25***	.17**	.01
2	Formal learning	2.39	2.40	0.99	0.98	1.37	1.46	2.84	3.31	.35***	.87/.92	.14	.07	.09	.01	.07	.18**	−.08	−.14*	.24***	.13*
3	Self-regulated learning	3.19	3.21	0.66	0.70	−0.04	0.08	0.07	−0.12	.42***	.33***	.72/.75	.16**	.13*	.13*	.14*	−.01	.01	−.04	.14*	.02
4	Internal qualitative emp.	2.48	2.50	0.90	0.95	0.42	0.72	0.12	0.34	.22***	.11	.18**	.92/.95	.60***	.42***	.28***	−.07	−.01	−.21***	.00	.06
5	Internal quantitative emp.	3.33	3.35	0.95	0.98	−0.28	−0.36	−0.23	−0.34	.28***	.14*	.22***	.60***	.84/.87	.24***	.41***	.04	−.10	−.22***	.07	.03
6	External qualitative emp.	2.96	2.96	0.95	0.94	0.24	0.12	−0.38	−0.31	.08	.07	.13*	.49***	.38***	.94/.95	.58***	−.05	−.05	−.23***	.04	.14*
7	External quantitative emp.	3.88	3.90	0.92	0.88	−0.78	−0.69	0.13	0.00	.25***	.14*	.18**	.37***	.50***	.62***	.89/.89	−.02	−.02	−.28***	.13*	.05
8	Home office hours per week	10.36	11.32	14.37	15.09	1.15	1.01	0.08	−0.44	.14*	.16**	.07	−.03	.10	−.07	−.00	-	−.14**	−.22***	.25***	.18**
9	Gender (1 = male, 2 = female)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	−.01	−.12*	.03	−.01	−.12*	−.06	−.07	−.14*	-	−.02	−.06	−.29***
10	Age (in years)	40.57	-	12.59	-	0.09	-	−1.39	-	−.29***	−.06	−.10	−.17**	−.22***	−.21***	−.32***	−.17**	−.02	-	−.12*	−.11
11	Vocational Education (1 = completed vocational training, 2 = academic degree)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	.18**	.30***	.21***	.09	.13*	.03	.16**	.25***	−.06	−.12*	-	.07
12	Employment status (1 = part-time, 2 = full-time)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	.02	.17**	−.00	.04	.04	.06	.09	.16**	−.29***	−.11	.07	-

Note. N = 307. emp. = Employability; t1 = time point 1; t2 = time point 2 (approximately four weeks after t1); internal consistency reliabilities (McDonald’s Omega) are reported on the diagonal (in bold) for t1/t2. Omega for informal learning refers to the 24-item version; the four mean indicators show ω = .71/.75. SD Skew t1 = 0.67, t2 = 0.66; SD Kurtosis = 0.88, t2 = 1.05. For demographics, correlations at t1 are shown; home office hours from t2 are used. Informal learning was surveyed on a 6-point Likert scale, formal learning on a 7-point Likert scale, and all other constructs on a 5-point Likert scale.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Figure 2. Effects of Work-related Learning on Employability.

Note. N = 307. Values shown are standardized parameter estimates. Gender, age, vocational education, employment status (part-time vs full-time), and home office hours per week were included as control variables. Manifest indicators of the latent constructs, error terms, correlations between work-related learning constructs at time 1, and correlations between employability constructs at time 2 (approximately four-week interval) are omitted for the sake of clarity. *p < .05.

Table 3. Uncontrolled and Controlled Models of the Effects of Work-related Learning on Employability.

Predictor Variable	Unstandardized Estimate
	Qualitative Internal E.	Quantitative Internal E.	Qualitative External E.	Quantitative External E.
Model 1
Informal learning	.48*	.56**	−.03	.45*
Formal learning	−.03	.00	−.02	.04
Self-regulated learning	.17	.14	.29✝	.03
Model 2 with Controls
Informal learning	.38*	.44*	−.19	.28
Formal learning	.01	.01	−.02	.04
Self-regulated learning	.18	.17	.31*	.03
Gender (1 = male, 2 = female)	−.01	−.22	−.10	−.06
Age (in years)	−.01***	−.01***	−.02***	−.02***
Vocational Education (1 = completed vocational training, 2 = academic degree)	−.12	−.04	−.05	.17
Employment status (1 = part-time, 2 = full-time)	.09	−.04	.25*	.03
Home Office hours per week	−.01*	−.00	−.01*	−.01*

Note. N = 307 (Model 1)/305 (Model 2). E. = Employability. The table shows unstandardized coefficients. For the standardized coefficients of the controlled model, see Figure 2. For work-related learning and demographic controls, time 1 (t1) data are used; for employability and home office hours, time 2 (t2) data are used (approximately four weeks after t1). Informal learning was surveyed on a 6-point Likert scale, formal learning on a 7-point Likert scale, and all other constructs on a 5-point Likert scale.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, ✝p = .064.

De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2011). The management paradox: Self‐rated employability and organizational commitment and performance. Personnel Review, 40(2), 152–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481111106057

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar