Perceived causes of career plateau in the public service

Darling, Sean; Cunningham, Barton Article Perceived causes of career plateau in the public service Administrative Sciences Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Darling, Sean; Cunningham, Barton (2023) : Perceived causes of career plateau in the public service, Administrative Sciences, ISSN 2076-3387, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 13, Iss. 3, pp. 1-20, https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13030073 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/275538 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Citation: Darling, Sean, and Barton Cunningham. 2023. Perceived Causes of Career Plateau in the Public Service. Administrative Sciences 13: 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci13030073 Received: 25 November 2022 Revised: 13 February 2023 Accepted: 15 February 2023 Published: 2 March 2023 Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). administrative sciences Article Perceived Causes of Career Plateau in the Public Service Sean Darling and Barton Cunningham * School of Public Administration, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The purpose of this paper was to develop a better understanding of the causes of career plateau in the public service, focusing on 67 people who we determined to be career plateaued. Our interviews identified examples of incidents describing successes and interruptions in careers in developing an overall picture of the reasons for people being plateaued. We identified ten themes, which were grouped into three areas: deficiencies in experience, skills and education (four themes); competition skills (four themes); and perceptions of favoritism and discrimination (two themes). In addition to feeling plateaued because of the inability to demonstrate experience, education, and knowledge, many people offered examples of being plateaued because of the lack of interviewing skills or evidence of favoritism and discrimination. Those who are plateaued because of favoritism or discrimination verbalize feelings of disgust and frustration and illustrate a tendency to become less engaged with their work. We think that the negative impacts of favoritism or systemic discrimination have important implications because they are likely to have an impact on employees and their engagement in their work and life. However, as our results are based a sample of 67 government employees in the Canadian public service, they require verification in other settings. Keywords: career plateau; discrimination; favoritism; public service 1. Introduction Most people would agree that a most frustrating and demotivating work experience is to be stuck in a job or blocked from advancing in one’s career. This experience, often referred to as a career plateau, is defined as a stage that some people experience when the probability of being promoted in the future is unlikely. Career plateaued individuals generally report unfavorable affective outcomes, such as lower job satisfaction and feelings of well-being, as well as undesirable work outcomes related to lower job performance, organizational commitment, and higher turnover intentions (Yang et al. 2019). While much of the existing career plateau research has focused on the impact of the career plateauing experience relating to job satisfaction, well-being, commitment, and turnover (Yang et al. 2019), there is little research exploring what employees perceive to be the causes of career plateau in the public service. As such, the purpose of this study is to develop a better understanding of the perceived causes of career plateau for employees in the public service. The study first reviews the career plateau literature and the potential causes and consequences from being career plateaued. We then summarize how we gathered examples of experiences that 67 employees felt helped or inhibited their career progression and themed these perceived causes of career plateau. 2. Literature Review 2.1. Career Plateau Research across the Decades A career plateau was originally defined “as the point in a career where the likelihood of additional hierarchical promotion is very low” (Ference et al. 1977), a definition which guided a great deal of subsequent work in career progression where career status was seen as the relationship of one’s progression to an organization’s hierarchy. Career plateaus were viewed as a natural consequence of the pyramidal structure of organizations, with Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13030073 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/admsci Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 2 of 20 fewer senior positions and ultimately one single position heading the organization. As such, there is a certainty that most people will plateau at some point during their careers. The proposition that plateau was a natural consequence of organizational structure was in opposition to the concept of the ‘Peter principle’, published almost a decade earlier (Peter and Hull 1969), which viewed promotion in terms of the level of one’s incompetence as a management norm. Identifying the pyramidal structure as the foundational cause of career plateau opened the search for other contributing factors that could be explored beyond simply placing the blame on the abilities of the individual and the number of positions at the top. Ference et al. (1977) divided career plateaued workers into two distinct categories. The first, termed “solid citizens”, were high performing individuals who might be unlikely to be promoted because of fewer positions in the pyramidal structure of the organization. Other causes are from the fierce competition for limited senior positions and older workers being passed over as a younger manager is viewed as having the potential to contribute to the organization for a longer period of time (Ference et al. 1977). Solid citizens can also be personally plateaued if they lack the personal characteristics required for further promotion or they do not desire further promotion. The other category of career plateaued employees was termed “dead wood” (Ference et al. 1977). Dead wood employees are poor performers who are unlikely to be promoted and were identified as ineffective. In addition to the two categories of plateaued employees, non-plateaued employees were identified as “stars” who are high performers with a high likelihood of promotion, and “learners” (comers) who were low performers with a high probability for future promotions. Ference et al. (1977) also suggested that organizations focus on stars and deadwood at the expense of employees they defined as “solid citizens”. Later, researchers broadened the concept of career plateau to include lateral position movement within an organization. As such, a ‘content plateau’ describes becoming plateaued in the growth of opportunities in the work, with a corresponding lack of opportunities to learn new skills (Veiga 1981). The need for employees to learn new skills and maintain lateral mobility was recognized as being one way to avoid the worst outcomes of being hierarchically plateaued (Bardwick 1986). Hierarchical and content plateau were further refined into three types: structural (hierarchical), content, and life (Bardwick 1986). Life plateauing was described as resulting from work-committed individuals who might be unsuccessful at work becoming plateaued and trapped in life. Bardwick (1986) describes career plateaus as involving stages of resistance and resignation. In the resistance stage, employees still believe they have an opportunity for promotion and continue to remain committed in the hopes of achieving a new position. Once they realize this is not going to happen, they move into the resignation stage, characterized as a gradual withdrawal from work and increasing passivity in the workplace (Bardwick 1986). Later, researchers suggested a fourth type of career plateau, a ‘double’ plateau, being both hierarchically and content plateaued at the same time (Allen et al. 1999). As the number of studies on career plateau has increased, common approaches for the study of career plateau can be identified. The assessment of career plateau status has been based predominantly on individually reported assessment (see, for example, Veiga 1981; Nachbagauer and Riedl 2002;Ettington 1998;Milliman 1992;Tremblay et al. 1995;Jung and Tak 2008;Xie et al. 2016;Wang et al. 2014), with four studies relying on the individual and organizational assessment of plateau status (Slocum et al. 1985,1987;Carnazza et al. 1981;Stout et al. 1988) and only two studies relying solely on organizational measurement (Orpen 1983;D. T. Hall 1985). Studies that rely upon a self-reported measure to determine plateau status are subject to the concerns of any research relying on self-reporting, such as reporting bias, error by participant, etc. (Carnazza et al. 1981;Stout et al. 1988). While those studies relying on the organizational determination of plateau status could be subject to reporting bias by other members of the organization. This is potentially troubling as Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 3 of 20 appraisals and assessments of plateaued staff are less likely to be unbiased when compared to assessments of non-plateaued staff (Near 1985;Ettington 1997,1998). The most highly debated aspect of career plateau research before the mid 1990s was the operationalization of plateau status as an objective or subjective variable. Subjective or perceptual measures of career plateau have been empirically demonstrated to be a better measurement approach and has grown to be the dominate method for classifying career plateau experiences from the mid-1990s (see Chao 1990;Milliman 1992;Tremblay et al. 1995;Lentze and Allen 2009). Subjective assessments involve the individual employee perceiving that they are at a dead end in terms of learning new job skills and knowledge or having advancement opportunities. Milliman’s (1992) scale (or scales derived from his work) has been the most used measurement scale in career plateau research and subjected to the greatest empirical validation (see Listing 1), and was used in the current study. Listing 1. Career plateau subjective measurement scales. Scale Study Milliman (1992) (similar or derivative) Allen et al. (1998); Allen et al. (1999); Armstrong-Stassen and Ursel (2009); Drucker-Godard et al. (2015); Cheng and Su (2013); Ettington (1997); Ettington (1998); Godshalk and Fender (2015); Helimen et al. (2008); Hurst et al. (2017); Jiang (2016); Jung and Tak (2008); Lapalme et al. (2009); Lentze and Allen (2009); McCleese et al. (2007); McCleese and Eby (2006); Milliman (1992); Wang et al. (2014); Wen and Liu (2015); Wickramasinghe and Jayaweera (2010); Xie et al. (2015,2016) Tremblay (1993) Tremblay and Roger (1993); Tremblay et al. (1995); Tremblay and Roger (2004) Chao (1990)Chao (1990); Lee (2003); Lemire et al. (1999) Corzine (1992) Corzine et al. (1994) Nachbagauer (2002) Nachbagauer and Riedl (2002) Carnazza (1981) Carnazza et al. (1981) Chay (1995) Chay et al. (1995) Rotondo (2000) Rotondo and Perrewe (2000) Sylvia (1986) Sylvia and Sylvia (1986) Unclear Beheshtifar and Modaber (2013); Ettington (1997) Career plateaus are believed to be more common in public sector organizations (Sylvia and Sylvia 1986;Lemire et al. 1999). This is an important point as research has established the relationship between career plateaus and decreased job and organizational commitment (e.g., Lentze and Allen 2009;Lemire et al. 1999;McCleese and Eby 2006;Milliman 1992; Nachbagauer and Riedl 2002;Stout et al. 1988;Xie et al. 2015), and decreased commitment was seen as having an impact on the quality of public services and citizen satisfaction with public services (Bei and Shang 2006;Wisniewski 2001). The decreased satisfaction with public services can contribute to elevated citizen distrust in government (VigodaGadot et al. 2012). Despite the benefits to society from engaged and committed public organizations, much of the career plateau research has been focused on the private sector (e.g., Carnazza et al. 1981;Corzine et al. 1994;Ettington 1998;D. T. Hall 1985;Lee 2003; Nicholson 1993;Veiga 1981). There are only three studies (Lentze and Allen 2009;Rotondo and Perrewe 2000;Sylvia and Sylvia 1986) which focus exclusively on career plateaus in the public sector. 2.2. Discrimination as a Cause of Being Career Plateaued Despite decades of career plateau research and dozens of published studies, there have been less than 20 studies that have touched upon the relationship between favoritism or discrimination and career plateau. Of these studies, most have examined issues of gender, race, or age as control variables when exploring the impacts of career plateau on the individual. Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 4 of 20 Five studies have found that older workers are more likely to be plateaued (Corzine et al. 1994;Near 1985;Jung and Tak 2008;Nicholson 1993;Savery and Wingham 1991). However, the relationship between age and plateau is not necessarily causal and is linked to a related concept of tenure, or how long an employee has been in a position in the organization. Some studies that point to age and tenure as being significantly associated with being career plateaued do not explore the concepts independently to examine the differences in the explained variance on an outcome measure. For example, Near (1985), in reporting the significant differences in age between plateaued and non-plateaued managers, did not attempt to account for interactions among these variables. While Evans and Gilbert (1984) found that the negative impacts associated with career plateau were caused by age, they felt that a sampling error might have partially contributed to their results. Other studies explore the relationship between age/tenure and career plateau in greater detail. For example, Jung and Tak (2008) and Corzine et al. (1994) indicated that older workers are more likely to become plateaued, while several more in-depth studies indicate that there is a weak correlation between age and objective and subjective career plateau (Tremblay and Roger 1993;Orpen 1983). Tremblay et al. (1995) found that being career plateaued is responsible for several consequences, even after controlling for age, despite subjective plateau being positively correlated to age. Similarly, Stout et al. (1988) found that age and tenure were covariates with plateau. but neither variable had a significant impact on the outcomes, even though the plateau status did. Several studies have focused on trying to explain the relationship between being plateaued and impacts such as turnover intentions, job satisfaction, and job search behavior, while controlling for several demographic characteristics, including age. For example, while age and job tenure accounted for less than 5% of the variance in the dependent measures, the addition of the perceptual measure of career plateau resulted in a significant increase in the explained variance (Chao 1990). Other authors support these findings, indicating that plateaued participants differed significantly in terms of work behaviors from non-plateaued people after controlling for age (Gerpott and Domsch 1987;Chay et al. 1995). There are only a few studies that have reviewed the impact of being plateaued using gender and race as control variables (Chay et al. 1995;Allen et al. 1999;Cheng and Su 2013; Helimen et al. 2008;Jung and Tak 2008;McCleese and Eby 2006;Rotondo and Perrewe 2000; Tremblay and Roger 1993;Tremblay and Roger 2004;Wang et al. 2014;Xie et al. 2015;Lu et al. 2003;Xie et al. 2016). The studies that have considered race and gender do not offer a clear picture of the impacts. Allen et al. (1999) surveyed plateaued and non-plateaued managers to explore the impact of plateau status on attitudinal variables. In terms of race, white participants were more likely to be hierarchically and double plateaued, as well as non-plateaued, than black participants, who were more likely to be content plateaued. In terms of gender, men were more likely to be double plateaued or non-plateaued than women, while women were more likely to be hierarchical or content plateaued. Burke and Mikkelsen (2006), in exploring career plateau amongst police officers, found plateaued officers included more women. Corzine et al. 1994looked at the impacts of mentoring, downsizing and gender on career plateau, job satisfaction and salary in the United States (US) banking sector. No relationship amongst gender was uncovered. Drucker-Godard et al. (2015), in examining aspects of career plateau amongst professors in France, found men were more satisfied and committed to their jobs than women. However, males were more likely to leave the organization than females. Milliman’s seminal dissertation work (Milliman 1992) uncovered that non-Caucasians are more likely to be hierarchically plateaued, but women were no more likely to plateaued than men. In review, most of the career plateauing research does not focus on the perceived causes of career plateau. In responding to this need, our study sought to develop a better understanding of the causes of career plateau among public servants who felt they had been plateaued. Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 5 of 20 3. Methodology The general research approach used an intensive interview design, which sought to develop a better understanding of the perceived causes of career plateau for people working in a public service organization. All of the participants in the study worked for the Canadian public service. 3.1. Sample We initially interviewed 74 individuals and focused on 67 people who we determined to be career plateaued using Milliman’s (1992) questionnaire. In our research, people described both being stalled from moving up the organizational hierarchy (hierarchical plateau) or being stalled in one’s growth and career progress because they had mastered their work. Some suggested that their job was boring and there are no ways to make the job more interesting and challenging (content plateau). Our purposeful sample focused on gaining an in-depth understanding of the representative experiences of being plateaued in a public sector organization. The average age of the study participants was 49.1 years. Twenty-eight participants were male (43%) and 38 were female (57%). The participants’ average job tenure was 5 years. The participants’ average public service career tenure was 19.3 years. Consistent with Patton’s (2015) recommendations, the participants in the study were selected because they represented “cases” illustrating career plateau experiences, which provided a profile to guide future research that might empirically verify the research findings to a broader population. While it is difficult to determine the appropriate size of non-probabilistic purposive sample size a priori (Palinkas et al. 2015), the goal of our sampling was to achieve a theoretical saturation point where the addition of data would not result in more information about properties within a concept (Glaser and Strauss 1967). Guest et al. (2006) provide experimental evidence that the saturation point can be reached with as few as 12 interviews. Although we felt that our interviews illustrated saturation and could be a reliable reflection of our specific sample, there is a need to examine our findings in other contexts. 3.2. Interview Design The interview participants answered a range of questions on their careers in government and their overall career experiences. The interviews sought information on the perceived reasons they felt career plateaued, with questions seeking to understand their experience of being plateaued and perceived reasons or causes. The participants were also asked about the personal impacts of being plateaued, as well as how they adapted. The interviews took approximately 1 1 /2 hours, with a few interviews being as short as one hour and several lasting over two. This style of question implemented a critical incident technique in eliciting examples (Flanagan 1954), an interview approach which has been used in various areas, such as determining competencies and behaviors related to managerial performance (Boyatzis 1982) and emotional and social competencies for teams fighting wildfires (Boyatzis et al. 2017). The technique provides a rich, qualitative look into events that illustrate the issues experienced or observed. The open-ended nature of the process allowed for exploration by the interviewee without forcing them into a biased or yes/no response. It also provided an opportunity to “drill down” on answers of particular interest, allowing individuals to tell stories related to their experience of being career plateaued (Krueger 2010). Stories capture the imagination and the audience’s attention, which also provides insight that cannot be captured through quantitative data. 3.3. Echo Sorting and Content Analysis The interviewees relayed over 395 examples of experiences, which were categorized into themes, thus illustrating the number of examples in each theme area. The number in each theme represents the number of individual comments. Although there have been various computer-aided text analysis methods developed in recent years, we relied on Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 6 of 20 individual and group Echo procedures in content analyzing the information we gathered (Cunningham 2001). This procedure is similar to other thematic analysis processes (Patton 2015;Braun and Clarke 2006;Boyatzis et al. 2017) where researchers individually sort the various examples in developing themes and the names of the themes are based on the words used by the interviewees. 4. Findings In developing an overall picture of reasons that people are plateaued, we identified ten themes, which were grouped into three areas: perceptions of favoritism and discrimination (two themes); deficiencies in experience, education, skills and education (four themes); and competition skills (four themes). Figure 1illustrates our overall findings within the organizational iceberg view of an organization and its underlying culture, where the top part of the iceberg (above the water line) is most visible while a very large part is hidden (below the water line) (E. T. Hall 1976). As such, the top part of the iceberg illustrates the most visible reasons for being plateaued (42% of all examples or 147/352). These comments were offered by 78% of our sample (52/67). Illustrated below the waterline of the iceberg, a large number of people offered examples of being plateaued because of the lack of competitive skills or evidence of favoritism and discrimination (205/352 comments). Some of these related to an inability to effectively compete and demonstrate the skills needed in the selection process (n = 21 or 31% of 67 individuals offering 52 comments). Several employees perceived that the process of promoting and hiring was based on how well they performed in interviews or other parts of the selection process, skills they felt might not be as relevant to the job. For example, one participant indicated that: “some people can interview with confidence and demonstrate a veneer of competence”, while another added, “it is all about how you answer the questions”. A final area in Figure 1relates to “perceived favoritism and discrimination”, and comments of being unfairly prevented from opportunities and promotions of “not getting ahead because of not having the right connections” or “not fitting into the dominant culture”. This was illustrated by 48 or 71% of 67 individuals who offered 153 comments. While some people indicated that they benefited from some of this favoritism because of a friend, others believed that friendships gave certain people more opportunities than others. The sense of appropriateness of the favoritism appears to relate to the employee’s perception of being a victim or a beneficiary. Being a victim involved “being backed by the wrong people and paying the price following a power struggle when they are on the chopping block”. 4.1. Inability to Demonstrate Experience, Abilities and Education On the face of it, experience, education, skills and abilities are the most verifiable way to improve one’s capability for progressing in a career. From an organizational perspective, these assets represent a person’s human capital and contribute to an individual’s productivity, as well to potential returns on organizational productivity. The task of the organization is to find employees who have the right knowledge, skills, and abilities to support the organization in achieving its goals and mission (Schultz 1961;Becker 1962;Selden 2009; Baldi and Trigeorgis 2020). Having the relevant job experience was seen as an important criterion in career progression, as illustrated for 37 of the 67 individuals in Table 1and, on the face of it, this seems to illustrate fairness in the selection process. As indicated by one person, “Having the right experience helps land a job where new opportunities are possible”. However, several participants point out that gaining the right experience can be difficult as jobs usually go to those who already have certain experiences. This creates the possibility of being unable to obtain a job because of a lack of experience, but not having the chance to obtain a job to gain the experience necessary to be promoted for the desired job. Despite such contradictions, experience is often viewed as a legitimate requirement that, even Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 7 of 20 when unfair promotions occur, managers often point to as justification for the successful candidate. “Even when hiring a friend, managers attempt to play up the experience of the candidate as the main reason for the selection”. In response, individuals often focus on gaining experience through temporary appointments and taking on new roles in their existing jobs, and “not getting stuck thinking that only one type of experience counts”. Adm. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 22 Figure 1. An iceberg view of the visible and lee visible causes of career plateauing. 4.1. Inability to Demonstrate Experience, Abilities and Education On the face of it, experience, education, skills and abilities are the most verifiable way to improve one’s capability for progressing in a career. From an organizational perspective, these assets represent a person’s human capital and contribute to an individual’s Figure 1. An iceberg view of the visible and lee visible causes of career plateauing. Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 8 of 20 Table 1. Inability to demonstrate experience, abilities and education (52 Study Participants contributing 147 Comments) N = 67. Job Experience 37 Participants 49 Comments -Experience is a basic requirement: You need to have experience related to the work and be able to demonstrate this during an interview. Every job posting has an experience requirement. Sometimes the posting language allows the waiving of requirements through an equivalency clause; you have to have recent experience which is relevant to the team. -Experience is hard to get when you are new. Even though experience is a requirement, it is hard to get experience when you don’t have experience. -How can you get a management job if they say you have to management experience to apply? It is hard to figure out what experiences are more important. Education 32 Participants 41 Comments -Education is seen as a foundation. You won’t get the interviews for a promotion or even lateral movement if you don’t have the right education. It is ve logical and makes sense . . . Really, education is the foundation of a good society . . . it depends entirely on what job you’re doing. If it is a financial job and they require a CPA, then you really need it to understand government’s accounting and financial requirements. -Training is important to support the skills you need to do the job and government does a really good job of providing work training with online courses . . . I went back to school to get my master’s degree so I could be more competitive. -Education is a requirement, but not always; The education requirement can be waived. Usually, an advanced degree is required for senior positions though sometimes they give the escape clause of ‘equivalent’ education and experience. But you don’t see equivalent education and experience for a law degree. The lawyers won’t let that happen . . . I have been screened out of job opportunities because I didn’t have the right education, as my history degree isn’t valued the way it should be. -My degree from China isn’t valued the same as Canadian degrees . . . Not everyone can afford the time and money to go back to school. Skills and Abilities (Knowledge) 29 Participants 36 Comments -Knowledge or Skills and abilities are important. You need to have the right skills to do the job. Without the skills and abilities, you won’t be successful. Managers won’t give you the chance to have the job to start with and if you did somehow manage to land the job you will struggle. -You need people who really know what they are doing, people with knowledge and insight. -We often use written assessments to gain an understanding of the candidate’s policy knowledge. -You need to understand how things are really done. If you’re working with FN communities, you need to understand how we do things. You must know the people you are working with. -Knowledge is hard to define; Knowledge relevant to the job is different than education and harder to judge; Knowledge is a very subjective criterion and is often judged by skills and abilities, but what is that? How do you gain knowledge other than through experience? Knowledge is common sense and ability to do the right thing, but how can we assess that? Fair Hiring and Promotion Process 12 Participants 21 Comments -A fair process is perceived to be fair; I have been in a few competitions where I was well prepared but was simply beat out by a better candidate; When I can see that the person who beat me is capable, I’m fine with that. -I’m a glass half full person so I realize that these things happen. I have been in a few competitions where I could tell I lacked what they were looking for. Sometimes, it was a little annoying as they could see that I didn’t have the qualifications, but they still interviewed me, sort of wasted everyone’s time but they do get a better candidate. -It makes me feel good to see someone promoted because of their experience and education. It helps counter the negativity I carry when I think of people getting ahead because they are simply willing to serve up. A fair outcome is a good outcome, whether you are the winner or loser. Table 1also illustrates the other visible criteria, which are used in selections and promotions that appear verifiable, but which might involve denying promotion opportunities because of a rule or norm. That is, education and abilities are foundational criteria, but there are norms which say that only a certain type of educational qualification or degree is relevant. The participants who identify educational requirements as a barrier to advancement reflect a perception that these requirements are simply part of the job market. However, there are perceptions of imbalances in the system, as not all education is equally valued. As participants said, “my degree from China is not seen the same way as a degree from Canada”, or “a law degree is more important than a degree in management”. Others suggest that “the engineers in my department are more likely to hire other engineers than Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 15 of 20 5. Discussion This study uncovers a deeper understanding of the perceived causes and impacts of being career plateaued in the public service and provides a rich description of the impacts resulting from personal biases and systemic discrimination over other causes. Our results use the iceberg metaphor in Figure 1to suggest that the causes of career plateau can be illustrated at three levels. That is, the most obvious reasons that people are plateaued, in Figure 1, related to job experience, education, skills and ability, as 78% of the 67 respondents indicated that this played a role in their being plateaued. However, 71% of our respondents also provided examples of favoritism and discrimination affecting their careers. While objective career success might be associated with human capital skills and demographic predictors, an individual’s subjective view of career success is strongly explained by individual differences (Ng et al. 2005). Our research illustrates a range of comments, in Table 4, related to competitive skills and evidence of favoritism and discrimination, which provide an extended view of the reasons why people might not be successful in a career. A less obvious reason, identified by 31% of the employees, relates to the competitive processes, which are partially hidden within the selection processes where there are biases that favor those who know how to demonstrate their capabilities. For this reason, we suggest that this bias is displayed in the middle of the iceberg model because it is not obvious or perceived to be a key limiting factor in promotions. However, we are suggesting that this bias favors those who are able to perform well in interviews and those who provide better examples to the questions asked, rather than criteria directly related to the performance of the specific job. The most vivid and disturbing finding is that favoritism or discrimination might be seen as a major reason why people become stuck at a career level rather than progressing. Many comments (71%) from the 67 individuals added 153 comments on favoritism and systemic biases. A larger number of these comments (40 individuals offered 109 examples) related to personal biases or favoritism and discrimination compared to systemic biases (30 individuals offering 44 examples), suggesting that the favoritism in a political and interpersonal world is a greater contributor. While most organizations position themselves as having hiring and promotion processes free of biases and discrimination, public service organizations in Canada pride themselves on merit-based hiring and fairness while ensuring merit-based hiring through law, organizational policies, and initiatives. Despite the efforts to create fairness, expressed through “open and transparent approaches to hiring; objective and relevant means of assessment, equitable treatment of applicants and reasonable decision”, such “objective” means of assessment seem to be affected by political and interpersonal relationships. There is a conventional wisdom that public servants behave responsibly with strong traditional Westminister values, and that public service remains “merit-driven”. However, Rohdes (2011), in studying the British government and the relationships between elected officials and their professional public servants, notes that policy directives and regulations are “meaningless when confronted by the imperative to cope and survive” as managers, politicians or civil servants (Rohdes 2011, p. 85). This suggests that the complex political and interpersonal relationships that exist between public servants illustrate a survival imperative that Rhodes identifies as impacting ministers and their public service staff. Other research has clearly revealed forms of discrimination illustrated in hiring and promotion based on race (Jones et al. 2017;Bartkoski et al. 2018;Zschirnt and Ruedin 2016;Quillian et al. 2017), gender (Koch et al. 2014;Jones et al. 2017;Davison and Burke 2000), weight (Rudolph et al. 2009), physical attractiveness (Hosoda et al. 2003) and age (Ng and Feldman 2010). The public service is not immune to these forms of discrimination that occur in the wider societies, of which the public services are part. The study adds to the previous studies that have illustrated that some of the causes of being plateaued can be linked to job and career satisfaction, the degree to which a person identifies with his or her work (Godshalk and Fender 2015) and the lack of opportunity Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 16 of 20 from upward promotions or from jobs which were too narrowly defined (Hurst et al. 2017). In other research, people plateaued because their roles as career officers changed from seeing oneself as warriors to being managers and technologists (Cheng and Su 2013). The current study is generally consistent with the previous research, but explores some of the issues in greater depth. Impacts Our research provides an eye-opening perspective of the impacts of being plateaued because of favoritism and systemic discrimination, and the possible profound personal impacts. Individuals seem to be able to make adjustments if they are plateaued because of a lack of skills and abilities, feeling they were uncompetitive in effectively demonstrating their skills in interviews, or do not know people who can be helpful in referring them to opportunities. That is, many took courses, engaged in other experiences, or practiced their interviewing skills to enhance their chances. In addition to feeling plateaued because of experience, education and knowledge, the respondents offered examples of being plateaued because of a lack of competitive skills or evidence of favoritism and discrimination. However, those who are plateaued because of favoritism or discrimination verbalize feelings of disgust and withdrawal, less engagement with work, or buying into practices that they originally felt were not honorable. 6. Conclusions This study provides a picture of the unique impact of being plateaued because of favoritism and systemic discrimination over other causes. While most people would agree that being stuck in a job or blocked from advancing in one’s career is a frustrating and demotivating, it is much more so when one perceives that there is favoritism and evidence of systemic discrimination. Career plateaued individuals generally report unfavorable affective outcomes, such as lower job satisfaction and feelings of well-being, as well as undesirable work outcomes (Yang et al. 2019); however, being plateaued because of perceptions of favoritism and systemic discrimination may have more personal damaging impacts relating to a disengagement with work, giving up and withdrawal. More specifically, they point to ways that career advancement might favor those who know how to “play the game” and succeed in the interview and selection process. Our findings suggest that the reason people are plateaued relates to their lack of skill, as well as the fact that there were better candidates for the job. However, beyond this, our interviewees perceived other causes of being plateaued, relating to the ability to demonstrate the skills and abilities in a job, the interview and selection process, which might give more importance to skills demonstrating an ability to answer questions rather than the skills necessary for a job, and evidence of favoritism and systemic discrimination. The biases and contradictions that cause career plateaus illustrate several “Catch-22 0 s” of being trapped in a number of contradictory dilemmas. Examples of the Catch-22s related to career progression include: • Needing to connect to people who can help you progress in your career, but being unable to meet the right people who can help. • Needing experience to be promoted, but being plateaued and not promoted because of a lack of experience, but not having the chance to obtain a job to gain the experience necessary to be promoted. • Needing to meet the requirement or criterion for career progression (i.e., education level as a foundational criterion), but not having the degree or education individuals or groups perceive as being more important. • Needing to illustrate the effectiveness of one’s skills for the job, but not being promoted due to being unable to demonstrate one’s true skills because of not being good at answering questions in the interviewing and the selection process. Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 17 of 20 • Needing to be connected to the values of the people in charge, but being plateaued because of biases, culture, or personal preferences or the group thinking of those in power. In a Westminster-like model of a Canadian public service organization, there is the expectation that career progression is a process based on merit. However, some people in the study felt plateaued because of an unfair system in which favoritism and systemic discrimination exists. What is new in this research is the possible devastating effect of being plateaued because of favoritism and discrimination, suggested by the greater likelihood to verbalize feelings of disgust, withdrawal or becoming less engaged with work. While these feelings are illustrated by the total sample, they may be particularly more devastating for minorities, women, indigenous people or those with disabilities. While our results did not intend to focus on minorities, women, indigenous people or those with disabilities, it might have implications for further research in this area. That is, while it might explain some of the feelings of the broader population, it might also provide insight in explaining the frustration of disadvantaged employees who are likely to experience more favoritism and systemic discrimination. This might have implications for why inequities continue to exist for these groups. We are mindful that our results are, at best, exploratory, as they are based on exploratory interviews of a small sample of government workers in the Canadian public service. Although we felt that our interviews illustrated saturation and additional interviews might not have elicited new examples or types of experiences, we cannot generalize our results. Future hypothesis testing research might focus on procedures that help encourage people to recognize how the process of selection illustrates a range of biases that need to be better understood. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.D. and B.C.; methodology, S.D. and B.C.; software, S.D. and B.C.; validation, S.D. and B.C.; formal analysis S.D. and B.C.; investigation, S.D. and B.C.; resources, S.D. and B.C.; data curation, S.D. and B.C.; writing—original draft preparation, S.D. and B.C.; writing—review and editing, S.D. and B.C.; visualization, S.D. and B.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by University of Victoria Protocol Number 17-256 2021-04-24. Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. Data Availability Statement: Due to participant privacy and ethical concerns, neither the data nor the source of the data can be made available. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References Allen, Tammy D., Joyce E. A. Russell, Mark L. Poteet, and Gregory H. Dobbins. 1999. Learning and development factors related to perceptions of job content and hierarchical plateauing. Journal of Organizational Behavior 20: 1113–37. [CrossRef] Allen, Tammy D., Mark L. Poteet, and Joyce E. A. Russell. 1998. Attitudes of managers who are more or less career plateaued. Career Development Quarterly 47: 159. [CrossRef] Armstrong-Stassen, Marjorie, and Nancy D. Ursel. 2009. Perceived organizational support, career satisfaction, and the retention of older workers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 82: 201–20. [CrossRef] Baldi, Francesco, and Lenos Trigeorgis. 2020. Valuing human capital career development: A real options approach. Journal of Intellectual Capital 21: 781–807. [CrossRef] Bardwick, Judith M. 1986. The Plateauing Trap. Toronto: Bantam Books. Bartkoski, Timothy, Ellen Lynch, Chelsea Witt, and Cort Rudolph. 2018. A meta-analysis of hiring discrimination against Muslims and Arabs. Personnel Assessment and Decisions 4: 1–16. [CrossRef] Becker, Gary S. 1962. Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy 70: 9–49. [CrossRef] Beheshtifar, Malikeh, and Hamide Modaber. 2013. The investigation of relation between occupational stress and career plateau. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business 4: 650–67. Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 18 of 20 Bei, Lien-Ti, and Cian-Fong Shang. 2006. Building marketing strategies for state-owned enterprises against private ones on the perspective of customer satisfaction and service quality. Journal of Retailing and Customer Service 13: 1–13. [CrossRef] Boyatzis, Richard E. 1982. The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance. Hoboken: Wiley. Boyatzis, Richard E., Kiko Thiel, Kylie Rochford, and Anne Black. 2017. Emotional and Social Intelligence Competencies of Incident Team Commanders Fighting Wildfires. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 53: 498–516. [CrossRef] Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77–101. [CrossRef] Burke, Ronald J., and Aslaug Mikkelsen. 2006. Examining the career plateau among police officers. International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 29: 691–703. [CrossRef] Carnazza, Joseph P., Abraham K. Korman, Thomas P. Ference, and James A. F. Stoner. 1981. Plateaued and non-plateaued managers: Factors in job performance. Journal of Management 7: 7–25. [CrossRef] Chao, Georgia T. 1990. Exploration of the conceptualization and measurement of career plateau: A comparative analysis. Journal of Management 16: 181–93. [CrossRef] Chay, Yue-Wah, Samuel Aryee, and Irene Chew. 1995. Career plateauing: Reactions and moderators among managerial and professional employees. International Journal of Human Resource Management 6: 61–78. [CrossRef] Cheng, Jen-Wei, and Tzu-Wei Su. 2013. Career Plateauing and Institutional/Occupational Intention for Taiwanese Career Officers. Military Psychology 25: 156–65. [CrossRef] Corzine, Janice B., Gabriel F. Buntzman, and Edgar T. Busch. 1994. Mentoring, downsizing, gender and career outcomes. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality 9: 517–28. Cunningham, Barton J. 2001. Researching Organizational Values and Beliefs: The Echo Approach. Westport: Quorum Books. Davison, Heather K., and Michael J. Burke. 2000. Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior 56: 225–48. [CrossRef] Drucker-Godard, Carole, Thierry Fouque, Mathilde Gollety, and Alice Le Flanchec. 2015. Career plateauing, job satisfaction and commitment of scholars in French universities. Public Organization Review 15: 335–51. [CrossRef] Ettington, Deborah R. 1997. How human resource practices can help plateaued managers succeed. Human Resource Management 36: 221–34. [CrossRef] Ettington, Deborah R. 1998. Successful Career Plateauing. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 52: 72–88. [CrossRef] Evans, Martin G., and Elizabeth Gilbert. 1984. Plateaued managers: Their need gratifications and their effort-performance expectations. Journal of Management Studies 21: 99–108. [CrossRef] Ference, Thomas P., James A. Stoner, and Kirby E. Warren. 1977. Managing the career plateau. Academy of Management Review 2: 602–12. [CrossRef] Flanagan, John C. 1954. The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin 51: 327–58. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Gerpott, Torsten J., and Michel Domsch. 1987. Research and development professionals reactions to the career plateau: Mediating effects of ++y behaviours and job characteristics. R and D Management 17: 103–18. [CrossRef] Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company. Godshalk, Veronica M., and Melissa C. Fender. 2015. External and internal reasons for career plateauing: Relationships with work outcomes. Group and Organization Management 40: 529–59. [CrossRef] Guest, Greg, Arwen Bunce, and Laura Johnson. 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods 18: 59–82. [CrossRef] Hall, Douglas T. 1985. Project work as an antidote to career plateauing in a declining engineering organization. Human Resources Management 24: 271–92. [CrossRef] Hall, Edward T. 1976. Beyond Culture. New York: Anchor Books. Helimen, Sharon G., Daniel T. Holt, and Christine Y. Rilovick. 2008. Effects of career plateauing on turnover: A test of a model. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 15: 59–68. Hosoda, Megumi, Gwen Coats, and Eugene F. Stone-Romero. 2003. The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Personnel Psychology 56: 431–62. [CrossRef] Hurst, Carrie S., Lisa E. Baranik, and Steven Clark. 2017. Job content plateaus: Justice, job satisfaction, and citizenship behaviour. Journal of Career Development 44: 283–96. [CrossRef] Jiang, Zhou. 2016. The relationship between career adaptability and job content plateau: The mediating roles of fit perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 95–96: 1–10. [CrossRef] Jones, Kristen P., Sabat E. Isaac, King B. Eden, Afra Ahmad, Tracy C. McCausland, and Tiffani Chen. 2017. Isms and schisms: A meta-analysis of the prejudice-discrimination relationship across racism, sexism, and ageism. Journal of Organizational Behavior 38: 1076–110. [CrossRef] Jung, Ji-hyun, and Jinkook Tak. 2008. The effects of perceived career plateau on employees’ attitudes: Moderating effects of career motivation and perceived supervisor support with Korean employees. Journal of Career Development 35: 187–201. [CrossRef] Koch, Amanda J., Susan D. D’Mello, and Paul R. Sackett. 2014. A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology 100: 128–61. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 19 of 20 Krueger, Richard A. 2010. Using stories in evaluation. In Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, 3rd ed. Edited by J. Wholey, H. Hatry and K. Newcomer. San Francisco: Josey-Bass, pp. 404–23. Lapalme, Marie-ève, Michel Tremblay, and Gilles Simard. 2009. The relationship between career plateauing, employee commitment and psychological distress: The role of organizational and supervisor support. International Journal of Human Resource Management 20: 1132–45. [CrossRef] Lee, Patrick Chang Boon. 2003. Going beyond career plateau: Using professional plateau to account for work outcomes. Journal of Management Development 22: 538–51. Lemire, Louise, Tania Saba, and Yves-Chantal Gagnon. 1999. Managing career plateauing in the Quebec public sector. Public Personnel Management 28: 375–91. [CrossRef] Lentze, Elizabeth, and Tammy D. Allen. 2009. The role of mentoring others in the career plateauing phenomenon. Group and Organization Management 34: 358–84. [CrossRef] Lu, Luo, Cary L. Cooper, Shu-Fang Kao, and Yun Zhou. 2003. Work stress, control beliefs and well-being in Greater China—An exploration of sub-cultural differences between the PRC and Taiwan. Journal of Managerial Psychology 18: 470–79. [CrossRef] McCleese, Carrie S., and Lillian T. Eby. 2006. Reactions to job content plateaus: Examining role ambiguity and hierarchical plateaus as moderators. The Career Development Quarterly 55: 64–76. [CrossRef] McCleese, Carrie S., Lillian T. Eby, Elizabeth A. Scharlau, and Bethany H. Hoffman. 2007. Hierarchical, job content, and double plateaus: A mixed-method study of stress, depression, and coping responses. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 71: 282–99. [CrossRef] Milliman, John Frost. 1992. Causes, Consequences, and Moderating Factors of Career Plateauing. Los Angeles: University of Southern California. Nachbagauer, Andreas G. M., and Gabriela Riedl. 2002. Effects of concepts of career plateaus on performance, work satisfaction and commitment. International Journal of Manpower 23: 716–33. [CrossRef] Near, Janet P. 1985. A discriminant analysis of plateaued versus non plateaued managers. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 26: 177–88. [CrossRef] Ng, Thomas W. H., and Daniel C. Feldman. 2010. The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology 63: 677–718. [CrossRef] Ng, Thomas W. H., Lillian T. Eby, Kelly L. Sorensen, and Daniel C. Feldman. 2005. Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology 58: 367–408. [CrossRef] Nicholson, Nigel. 1993. Purgatory or place of safety? The managerial plateau and organizational age grading. Human Relations 46: 1369–89. [CrossRef] Orpen, Christopher. 1983. The career patterns and work attitudes of plateaued and non-plateaued managers. International Journal of Manpower 4: 32–36. [CrossRef] Palinkas, Lawrence A., Sarah M. Horwitz, Carla A. Green, Jennifer P. Wisdom, Naihua Duan, and Kimberly Hoagwood. 2015. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administrative Policy Mental Health 42: 533–44. [CrossRef] Patton, Michael Quinn. 2015. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 4th ed. London: Sage. Peter, Laurence F., and Raymond Hull. 1969. The Peter Principle. New York: Morrow. Quillian, Lincoln, Devah Pager, Ole Hexela, and Arnfinn H. Midtbøen. 2017. Meta-analysis of field experiments shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 114: 10870–75. [CrossRef] Rohdes, Roderick A. W. 2011. Thinking on: A career in public administration. Public Administration 89: 196–212. [CrossRef] Rosenbaum, James E. 1984. Career Mobility in a Corporate Hierarchy. Toronto: Academic Press, Inc. Rotondo, Demise M., and Pamela L. Perrewe. 2000. Coping with a career plateau: An empirical examination of what works and what doesn’t. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30: 2622–46. [CrossRef] Rudolph, Cort W., Charles L. Wells, Marcus D. Weller, and Boris B. Baltes. 2009. A meta-analysis of empirical studies of weight-based bias in the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior 74: 1–10. [CrossRef] Savery, Lawson K., and Dianne L. Wingham. 1991. Coping with the career plateau: Motivators for directors of child-care centres. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 12: 20–23. [CrossRef] Schultz, Theodore W. 1961. Investment in human capital. The American Economic Review 51: 1–17. Selden, Sally C. 2009. Human Capital: Tools and Strategies in the Public Sector. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Slocum, John W., William L. Cron, and Linda C. Yows. 1987. Whose career is likely to plateau? Business Horizons 30: 31–38. [CrossRef] Slocum, John W., William L. Cron, Richard W. Hansen, and Sallie Rawlings. 1985. Business strategy and the management of plateaued employees. The Academy of Management Journal 28: 133–54. [CrossRef] Stout, Suzanne K., John W. Slocum, and William L. Cron. 1988. Dynamics of the career plateauing process. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 32: 74–91. [CrossRef] Sylvia, Ronald D., and Kathleen M. Sylvia. 1986. An empirical investigation of the impacts of career plateauing. International Journal of Public Administration 8: 227–41. [CrossRef] Tremblay, Michel, Alain Roger, and Jean-Marie Toulouse. 1995. Career plateau and work attitude: An empirical study of managers. Human Relations 48: 221–37. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2023,13, 73 20 of 20 Tremblay, Michel, and Alain Roger. 1993. Individual, familial and organizational determinants of career plateau. Group and Organization Management 18: 411–35. [CrossRef] Tremblay, Michel, and Alain Roger. 2004. Career plateauing reactions: The moderating role of job scope, role ambiguity and participation among Canadian managers. International Journal of Human Resource Management 15: 996–1017. [CrossRef] Veiga, John F. 1981. Plateaued versus nonplateaued managers: Career patterns, attitudes and path potential. Academy of Management Journal 24: 566–78. [CrossRef] Vigoda-Gadot, Eran, Liat Eldor, and Lior M. Schohat. 2012. Engage them to public service: Conceptualization and empirical examination of employee engagement in public administration. American Review of Public Administration 43: 518–38. [CrossRef] Wang, Yu-Hsuan, Changya Hu, Carrie S. Hurst, and Chun-Chi Yang. 2014. Antecedents and outcomes of career plateaus: The roles of mentoring others and proactive personality. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 85: 319–28. [CrossRef] Wen, Yueran, and Liu Liu. 2015. Career plateau and turnover intention in Chinese employees: Career anchor as moderator. Social Behaviour and Personality 43: 757–66. [CrossRef] Wickramasinghe, Vathsala, and Mayura Jayaweera. 2010. Impact of career plateau and supervisory support on career satisfaction: A study in offshore outsourced IT firms in Sri Lanka. Career Development International 15: 544–61. [CrossRef] Wisniewski, Mik. 2001. Using SERVQUAL to assess customer satisfaction with public sector services. Managing Service Quality 11: 380–89. [CrossRef] Xie, Baoguo, Xinxin Lu, and Wenxia Zhou. 2015. Does double plateau always lead to turnover intention? Evidence from China with indigenous career plateau scale. Journal of Career Development 42: 540–53. [CrossRef] Xie, Baoguo, Xun Xin, and Guanglin Bai. 2016. Hierarchical plateau and turnover intention of employees at the career establishment stage: Examining mediation and moderation effects. Career Development International 21: 518–33. [CrossRef] Yang, Wei-Ning, Karen Niven, and Sheena Johnson. 2019. Career plateau: A review of 40 years of research. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 110: 286–302. [CrossRef] Zschirnt, Eva, and Didier Ruedin. 2016. Ethnic discrimination in hiring decisions: A meta-analysis of correspondence tests 1990–2015. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 42: 1115–34. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.