Drawing from the premises of career capital theory (Inkson & Arthur, 2001; Parker et al., 2013), individuals’ career mindsets represent an espoused career identity (‘knowing why’) in relation to the world of work. The career identity facilitates uniquely differentiating motivational patterns in approaching the work world and responding to contextual changes, including individuals’ identification with the world of work, and the manner in which they pursue career goals (Abessolo et al., 2017; Brown et al., 2020; Coetzee, 2022; Schein & Van Maanen, 2016). Individuals’ ‘knowing why’ career capital denotes their intrinsic career motivations, values and interests that direct the inner career towards the achievement of career goals and career satisfaction (Dickmann et al., 2018). Individuals generally adopt a primary or dominant career mindset that drives their internal motivational pattern (or ‘knowing why’ career capital) towards exploring the external world of work for suitable jobs and occupations (Brown et al., 2020; Schein, 1990; Schein & Van Maanen, 2016; Sutherland et al., 2015).

This study was interested in examining the influence of five forms of career mindsets known to exhibit uniquely differentiating career-related motivational attitudes towards external career exploration. The notion of career mindsets is based on Schein’s (1990) theory of career anchors and research by Wils et al. (2010) and Abessolo et al. (2017) on the career anchors construct. Of relevance to this study are the career anchor-related, values-driven motivations of the careerist (general managerial competence), bureaucratic (security and stability), social (service and dedication to a cause) and protean (pure challenge and entrepreneurial creativity) mindset.

Individuals with the careerist mindset of general managerial competence are more likely to pursue career paths offering professional success, power and achievement (‘knowing why’ career capital). They value self-enhancement and leave little room for uncertainty and would prefer to work in well-structured and organised environments with opportunities to follow an upward managerial track (Abessolo et al., 2017; Schein, 1990). The careerist mindset is associated with lower levels of career agility (i.e. adaptivity towards the ill-defined complexities and challenges of the digital-era world of work: Coetzee, 2022). The ‘knowing why’ career capital of the bureaucratic career mindset of security and stability relates to predictable, stable workspaces and jobs and occupations that offer continuity with employment and financial security and certainty. Their career identity motivation revolves around the human values of loyalty and conservation of tradition (Abessolo et al., 2017; Schein & Van Maanen, 2016; Wils et al., 2010). Individuals with a social career mindset endorse values of self-transcendence and are motivated (‘knowing why’ career capital) by career paths that offer opportunities for personal growth and contributing something of value in the larger society (Schein & Van Maanen, 2016; Wils et al., 2010).

The protean career mindset alludes to ‘knowing why’ career capital stemming from the need for freedom, professional growth, influence and self-determination. ‘Knowing why’ career capital is applied to the search of career paths that offer opportunities to create wealth through an enterprise or organisation of one’s own and new, enterprising products and services (entrepreneurial creativity) or using expertise to solve challenging problems (pure challenge), win out over worthy opponents and overcome difficult obstacles (Schein & Van Maanen, 2016). The protean career mindset generally revolves around valuing openness to change and exhibiting agentic, self-directed career agile behaviour across multiple changing, boundaryless workspaces (Abessolo et al., 2017; Coetzee, 2022; Hall et al., 2018).

Individuals who abide by a protean career mindset are known to exhibit a crystallised career identity and inner directedness, including the capacity to cope with and adapt in response to rapidly shifting turbulent conditions (Hall et al., 2018). Research further shows a link between the protean career mindset and a willingness to engage in external career exploration, gaining knowledge of the impact of the digital era on job and employment opportunities and upskilling oneself accordingly to enhance their ‘knowing what’ career capital (Coetzee, 2022; Tee et al., 2022). The protean career mindset is further deemed important for career development and success in the digital-driven work world because of the associated career capital that facilitates proactive initiatives in creating and influencing work circumstances and the likelihood of career success and employability (Cortellazzo et al., 2020; Tee et al., 2022).

The contemporary fast-advancing, technological-driven work world requires from individuals to rapidly adapt to and evolve with the transformation of organisations, work, jobs and occupations for sustainable careers and employability (Coetzee & Veldsman, 2022; Kohl & Swartz, 2019). In this regard, the career mindset-related external career exploration process energises individuals’ interest in the world of work and the drive to build the ‘knowing what’ career capital they need for successful career development in the digital-era workspace (Bates et al., 2019; Jiang et al., 2019; Valickas et al., 2019). ‘Knowing what’ career capital relates to individuals’ world of work orientation, which may include inter alia, awareness of jobs and occupations in the market, insight into the world of work competency they require and evaluation of whether their higher education studies contribute to their readiness for jobs and occupations in the world of work (Coetzee et al., 2022; Sutherland et al., 2015).

We draw from both principles of career capital theory (DeFillippi & Arthur, 1994) and approach-motivation theory (Elliot, 2006; Shao et al., 2018) to elucidate the notion of distance learning employees’ work world orientation in relation to their career mindsets. Individuals’ approach towards a situational context is generally activated or invigorated by intrinsic motivations associated with their ‘knowing why’ and ‘knowing what’ career capitals that direct their responses towards stimuli in the external environment. The ‘knowing why’ career capital pertains to the career identity mindset that invigorates the intrinsic motivational energy individuals bring to their internal and external career exploration (Jiang et al., 2019). The process of external career exploration involves building ‘knowing what’ career capital (e.g. gaining understanding of work world dynamics, available or possible jobs and occupations, including upskilling and development opportunities for employability: Sutherland et al., 2015). ‘Knowing what’ career capital alludes to the activation of approach-motivation that results in individuals evaluating the environment as benign and proffering positive stimuli and possibilities for achieving success (Jones & DeFilippi, 1996). Research shows links between a state of approach motivation and cognitive flexibility and originality towards external stimuli (Shao et al., 2018).

In the present study, the construct of world of work orientation denotes students’ ‘knowing what’ career capital that involves their: (1) awareness of the world of work, (2) world of work competency and (3) world of work readiness (Coetzee et al., 2021; Jones & DeFilippi, 1996; Sutherland et al., 2015). The triarchic model of distance learning employees’ world of work orientation and the various sub-facets is diagrammatically presented in Figure 1. The facet of ‘world of work awareness’ relates to individuals’ interest in and optimism about digital-technological innovation as a major driver of new employment opportunities (awareness of digital nature of work), knowledge of available jobs and occupations and clarity about skills and knowledge needed to qualify for them (occupation and job awareness) and them valuing upskilling in and application of required knowledge and skills in a technology-driven world of work and across multiple organisational workspaces (continuous learning and upskilling: Bates et al., 2019; Coetzee et al., 2021).

‘World of work competency’ refers to employees’ self-efficacious business acumen, leadership skills, information retrieval, numeracy, communication and critical thinking skills and capability for the multidisciplinary problem solving of complex business problems (business ingenuity). Individuals’ sociodigital agility involves their self-efficacious inter-digital competency relating to digital collaboration for problem solving, managing socio-cultural diversity and self-directed management of their own career and employability (Coetzee et al., 2019, 2021; Kohl & Swartz, 2019).

‘World of work readiness’ refers to individuals’ job and occupation certitude involving them having, as a result of their further studies, clear career goals, optimism and clarity about available jobs or occupations in their study field, including the skills, knowledge and training required. Individuals’ job and occupation fitness alludes to their optimism about their studies’ contribution to their preparedness for the digital-era work world and career pathways, job and occupation navigation and the actual development of required knowledge and skills for employability in preferred occupations and jobs (Bates et al., 2019; Coetzee et al., 2021). Research shows that individuals’ awareness of the world of work, employment opportunities and insight into jobs and occupations in the field of study influence their capacity to manage their employability. Accordingly, employers regard universities as important conduits for developing the career capital and approach motivation of graduates (Tomlinson, 2007; Winterton & Turner, 2019).

Integrating the insights derived from the research literature, we propose that individuals’ career mindset (‘knowing why’ career capital) can influence their world of work orientation (‘knowing what’ career capital) because the mindsets allude to relatively stable, intrinsic values-driven motivations that are embedded in dominant career self-concept-related capital, which facilitates differentiating external career exploration cognitions and behaviour (Coetzee, 2022; Dickmann et al., 2018; Rodrigues et al., 2013; Schein & Van Maanen, 2016). It therefore stands to reason that in the internal and external career exploration process, individuals’ career mindsets may direct or influence their orientation towards the digital-era work world (Coetzee, 2022). Drawing from approach-motivation theory (Elliot, 2006), individuals’ work world orientation facets are assumed to represent approach-motivated invigorated cognitions towards career goal pursuit strategies (i.e. building ‘knowing what’ career capital) that contribute to their career success through the world of work awareness, competency and clarity on preferred job and occupation opportunities.

We further suggest that the various career mindsets may exhibit varied associations with the digital-era world of work orientation facets because of the underpinning differentiating value-oriented motivational cognitions about the desired career that may be pursued within a digital-era workspace. We expected, for example, that the protean career mindsets (pure challenge and entrepreneurial creativity) with its self-directed openness to change and continuous learning (Hall et al., 2018; Schein & Van Maanen, 2016), would positively explain individuals’ evaluation of their world of work awareness, world of work competency and world of work readiness. The careerist (general managerial competence), bureaucratic (security and stability) and social (service and dedication to a cause) mindsets would explain only certain facets of individuals’ world of work orientation because these career mindsets may tend to be drawn to only those world of work orientation facets that resonate with their career mindset motivations. However, there is currently a paucity of research on the influence of career mindsets as career capital on individuals’ digital-era work world orientation. Accordingly, the following research question ensued from our reasoning:

Research question: To what extent do individuals’ career mindsets as career capital predict the various facets of their digital-era world of work orientation?

The participants were (N = 486) employed undergraduate students who were pursuing studies in the economic and management sciences field at a higher education institution. The students were recruited from a comprehensive South African open and distance e-learning university. The mean age of the participants was 34.34 years (SD = 9.12; age range 25–55 years). There were 171 men (35%) and 314 women (65%) of whom 348 were in employment (72%) and 138 (28%) unemployed. Most of the student participants felt that the acceleration of technology brings new, exciting job and career opportunities (365; 75%). Most of them also revealed that they are actively searching for job roles that evolve with changing technological conditions because these jobs offer opportunities for growth and creativity (390; 80%).

Participants completed four measures. The first measure related to individuals’ career mindsets (careerist: general managerial competence; protean: entrepreneurial creativity and pure challenge; bureaucratic: security and stability and social: service and dedication to a cause). The second set of three measures related to facets of individuals’ digital-era world of work orientation. The first facet pertained to individuals’ awareness of the digital nature of work, occupation and job awareness and continuous upskilling and learning awareness. The second world of work orientation facet measured their personal evaluations of their world of work competency (business ingenuity and sociodigital agility). The third facet measured their perceptions about the extent to which their studies contributed to their world of work readiness (job and occupation certitude and job and occupation fitness).

Based on the career orientations scale of Schein (1990), the students expressed their preferences for the various career mindsets: general managerial competence (five items; e.g. ‘I would rather leave my organisation than accept a job that would take me away from the general managerial track’); entrepreneurial creativity (five items; e.g. ‘I will feel successful in my career only if I have succeeded in crafting or building something that is entirely my own product or idea’); pure challenge (five items; e.g. ‘I seek out work opportunities that strongly challenge my problem solving and competitive skills’); security and stability (five items; e.g., ‘I am most fulfilled in my work when I feel that I have complete financial and employment security’) and service and dedication to a cause (five items; e.g. ‘I will feel successful in my career only if I have a feeling of having made a real contribution to the welfare of society’). Responses were measured on a six-point Likert scale (1 = not true at all for me; 6 = always true for me). The internal reliability coefficients of the subscales ranged between 0.74 and 0.84. Coetzee (2022) confirmed the construct validity of the scale.

The world of work orientation scale developed by Coetzee et al. (2021) was used to measure as first facet, students’ perceptions of the: (1) digital nature of work (five items; e.g. ‘I see technological innovation as a major driver of new employment and career opportunities’), (2) occupation and job awareness (three items; e.g. ‘I have a clear picture of jobs and occupational opportunities made possible by new technological advancements in my field of study’) and (3) continuous upskilling and learning awareness (seven items; e.g. ‘It is important for me to develop special knowledge and skills that will help me get the job I want in a world of work that is driven by constant technological innovation’). Responses were measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The internal reliability coefficients of the subscales ranged between 0.87 and 0.92. Coetzee (2022) confirmed the construct validity of the scale.

The world of work orientation scale (Coetzee et al., 2021) was also used to measure as second facet, students’ evaluations of their business ingenuity (11 items; e.g. ‘I bring new, innovative solutions to complex business and economic problems’) and sociodigital agility (10 items; e.g. ‘I feel confident in using online tools such as search engines to gather information and data and to solve problems in the digital world of work’). Responses were measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The internal reliability coefficients of the subscales were 0.91 and 0.94. Coetzee et al. (2021) confirmed the construct validity of the scale.

The extent to which students perceived their studies to contribute to their world of work readiness was the third facet measured by the world of work orientation scale (Coetzee et al., 2021). The scale measured perceptions of students’ job and occupation certitude (six items; e.g. I have a clear, written plan for how to get into the type of occupation or type of job I choose’) and job and occupation fitness (six items; e.g. ‘My studies equip me with the knowledge and skills that I need to apply in my job’) were measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The internal reliability coefficients of the subscales were 0.88 and 0.92. Coetzee et al. (2021) confirmed the construct validity of the scale.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to examine the discriminant validity among the 12 latent variables in the measurement model. Maximum likelihood estimation was applied. The statistical package AMOS (Arbuckle, 2021) Version 28 was utilised. Firstly, a single factor CFA was tested, and secondly, a multi-factor CFA was tested. Descriptive statistics, internal consistency reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability [CR]), Pearson product-moment correlations and linear regression analysis were calculated and analysed using IBM Corp. (2021) SPSS Version 28. The bootstrapping stringent lower-level confidence interval (LLCI) and upper level confidence interval (ULCI) range not containing zero was used to interpret significant regression effects at the 95% confidence interval (Hair et al., 2019). The observed statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) career mindset regression estimates upon the seven world of work orientation variables were then subjected to structural equation modelling (SEM) to assess the validity of the structural model. The statistical package AMOS (Arbuckle, 2021), Version 28 was utilised. The following threshold fit indices for model fit suggested by Hair et al. (2019) served as guideline for CFA and SEM model acceptance: Minimum Discrepancy Function by Degrees of Freedom divided (CMIN/df) < 3; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) and Standardized Root Mean Squared Residual (SRMR) < 0.07; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) ≥ 0.90.

The study was approved by the research ethics review and permission committees of the university (#2020_CEMS-IOP_031 and #2020_RPC_051). Participants received an invitation for anonymous, voluntary participation via an email from a ‘noreply’ student system administrator. The email contained an URL link to an online questionnaire. The participants provided informed consent that the researchers may use the data for anonymous, group-based research purposes.

We compared fit statistics of two alternative models to the baseline model. The single factor CFA model (loading all indicators onto a single latent variable) did not have a good fit with the data: CMIN/df = 4.35; RMSEA = 0.08; SRMR = 0.09; CFI = 0.47; AIC = 19 370.7. The final multi/12-factor latent variable model (with indicators loading onto their respective factor) showed better and good model fit and thus discriminant validity among the 12 latent variables: CMIN/df = 2.05; RMSEA = 0.05; SRMR = 0.04; CFI = 0.90; Akaike’s Information Criteria (AIC) = 3859.4.

Table 1 provides a summary of the descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations. The internal consistency reliability coefficients (both Cronbach alphas and CRs) were higher (≥ 0.71) than the cut-off value (0.70: Hair et al., 2019) for good reliability. The five career mindset variables had positive and significant correlations (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.04) with the seven world of work orientation variables (r ≥ 0.09 [small practical effect] to r ≤ 0.51 [large practical effect]).

Table 2 summarises the regression estimates results for the regression of the five career mindsets upon the seven world of work orientations. Seven linear regression models were tested (one for each world of work orientation variable). The F-statistic for each model was significant:

Based on the guidelines of Hair et al. (2019), the variance inflation factor (VIF) values for all the construct variables were inspected for issues of collinearity to avoid misleading or bias estimation of the results. The results revealed VIF values of < 2.70, indicating no potential collinearity issues.

As shown in Table 2, the protean career mindset of pure challenge had significant and positive regression effects on all seven of the world of work orientation variables (β ≥ 0.24 to β ≤ 0.45; p = 0.000; the LLCI and UCL range did not contain any zero). The protean career mindset of entrepreneurial creativity had only positive and significant regression effects on awareness of the digital nature of work (β = 0.08; p = 0.05; LLCI = 0.02; ULCI = 0.14) and occupation and job awareness (β = 0.09; p = 0.04; LLCI = 0.003; ULCI = 0.17).

The social career mindset of service and dedication to a cause had a significant and positive regression effect on job and occupation fitness (β = 0.17; p = 0.000; LLCI = 0.07; ULCI = 0.27). The bureaucratic career mindset of security and stability had a significant and positive regression effect on awareness of the digital nature of work (β = 0.18; p = 0.000; LLCI = 0.09; ULCI = 0.27), continuous learning and upskilling awareness (β = 0.20; p = 0.000; LLCI = 0.12; ULCI = 0.27), sociodigital agility (β = 0.13; p = 0.000; LLCI = 0.07; ULCI = 0.20), job and occupation certitude (β = 0.09; p = 0.05; LLCI = 0.001; ULCI = 0.17) and job and occupation fitness (β = 0.14; p = 0.002; LLCI = 0.05; ULCI = 0.23). The careerist mindset of general managerial competence had positive and significant regression effects on occupation and job awareness (β = 0.15; p = 0.000; LLCI = 0.07; ULCI = 0.23), job and occupation certitude (β = 0.11; p = 0.000; LLCI = 0.05; ULCI = 0.17) and job and occupation fitness (β = 0.08; p = 0.01; LLCI = 0.02; ULCI = 0.14).

The observed statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) career mindset regression estimates upon the seven world of work orientation variables were subjected to SEM to assess the validity of the structural model. The structural model had a good fit with the model data: CMIN/df = 2.25; RMSEA = 0.05; SRMR = 0.05; CFI = 0.90.