ABSTRACT
This study aimed to examine the main predictors of employability, building on a recent conceptual model on employability developed by Lo Presti and Pluviano (Organ Psychol Rev 6(2): 192-211, 2016). Survey based data were collected from a sample of 263 Italian job-seekers through a longitudinal study. The results revealed that employability was more strongly determined by personal dispositions than by external factors, such as life circumstances and that the variables with the most impact were proactive personality, core self-evaluations, and educational level, rather than employability culture, family employability support, and previous work experience. The paper reveals an understanding of the relative importance of antecedents that determine employability.
La route vers l'employabilité : Une étude longitudinale sur un échantillon de demandeurs d'emploi italiens Cette étude visait à examiner les principaux prédicteurs de l'employabilité, en s'appuyant sur un modèle conceptuel récent de l'employabilité développé par Lo Presti et Pluviano (Organ Psychol Rev 6(2): 192211, 2016). Des données basées sur des enquêtes ont été recueillies auprès d'un échantillon de 263 demandeurs d'emploi italiens dans le cadre d'une étude longitudinale. Les résultats ont révélé que l'employabilité était plus fortement déterminée par les dispositions personnelles que par des facteurs externes, tels que les circonstances de la vie, et que les variables ayant le plus d'impact étaient la personnalité proactive, les auto-évaluations fondamentales/de base et le niveau d'éducation, plutôt que la culture de l'employabilité, le soutien familial à l'employabilité et l'expérience professionnelle antérieure. Le document révèle une compréhension de l'importance relative des antécédents qui déterminent l'employabilité.
El camino a la empleabilidad: Un estudio longitudinal con una muestra de desempleados italianos Este estudio pretende examinar los principales predictores de empleabilidad, construyendo un modelo conceptual de empleabilidad desarrollado por Lo Presti y Pluviano (Organ Psychol Rev 6(2): 192211, 2016). La información fue recogida a través de una encuesta realizada a 263 Italianos en situación de búsqueda de empleo, a través de un estudio longitudinal. Los resultados revelaron que la empleabilidad estaba más fuertemente determinada por la disponibilidad personal que por factores externos como las circunstancias vitales. Las variables con más impacto fueron la personalidad proactiva, las autoevaluaciones básicas y el nivel educativo, y no tanto la cultura de ocupabilidad, el soporte familiar a la empleabilidad y las experiencias de trabajo previas. El artículo revela la importancia relativa de los antecedentes que determinan la empleabilidad.
ABSTRACT
Editors of scientific journals meet increasing challenges to find peer reviewers. Rewarding reviewers has been proposed as a solution to incentives peer review, and journals have already started to offer different kinds of rewards, particularly non-monetary ones. However, research so far has mainly explored the efficacy of monetary rewards, while research on non-monetary rewards is barely absent. The goal of this article is to fill this gap by exploring whether and under what conditions a rather common non-monetary reward employed by journals, i.e., to recognize reviewers work by publishing their names on a yearly issue, is effective in increasing the willingness of scientists to become peer reviewers. We test the efficacy of three different reward settings identified in the literature: (1) engagement contingent, (2) task-completion contingent, and (3) performance contingent, through a natural experiment involving 1865 scientists in faculties of business and economics of Romanian universities. We explore whether reward efficacy varies across scientists depending on their gender, academic rank, research productivity, and type of institution to which they are affiliated. The results show that the performance contingency strongly reduces the number of respondents willing to become reviewers (- 60 % compared to a no-reward setting), particularly males and research productive scientists. Scientists affiliated with private universities are strongly discouraged by the reward. In sum, the results suggest that non-monetary rewards are not necessarily effective, as in some cases they may actually discourage the most intrinsically motivated and competent reviewers.