Human Resource Development International

ISSN: 1367-8868 (Print) 1469-8374 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhrd20

Signalling organizational commitment to

employability through job advertisements:
the communication of HRD practices to young
inexperienced job seekers

Katherine Moore & Maria Hameed Khan

To cite this article: Katherine Moore & Maria Hameed Khan (2020) Signalling organizational
commitment to employability through job advertisements: the communication of HRD practices to
young inexperienced job seekers, Human Resource Development International, 23:1, 25-45, DOI:
10.1080/13678868.2019.1679569

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2019.1679569

Published online: 16 Oct 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 336

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rhrd20
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL
2020, VOL. 23, NO. 1, 25–45
https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2019.1679569

PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE

Signalling organizational commitment to employability

through job advertisements: the communication of HRD
practices to young inexperienced job seekers
Katherine Moore and Maria Hameed Khan
QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

In a time where young people across most industrialized countries Received 7 November 2018
are at high risk of unemployment, there is a growing need for Accepted 8 October 2019
organizations to commit to developing the employability of KEYWORDS
young, inexperienced and unqualified job seekers to ensure their Human resource
future sustainable employment. The current study draws on the development practices;
notion of employability as a mutual responsibility of both organiza- employability; young job
tions and individuals, the Human Resource Development (HRD) seekers; signalling theory;
practices that develop employability in employees, and signalling youth unemployment
theory to investigate the extent to which organizations communi-
cate their commitment to developing young people’s employability
via job advertisements. The key employability HRD practices were
conceptualized as training, competency development, career
development, mentoring, coaching and networking opportunities.
Content analysis was used to identify the HRD practices that
appeared in job advertisements for entry-level positions. Cross-
tabulations determined the frequency of practices across job clas-
sifications and work types. The results showed that more than half
of the job advertisements included at least one reference to a key
HRD practice. The findings suggest that organizations are signalling
a commitment to developing the human capital and career identity
elements of employability and, to a lesser extent, social capital for
young job seekers. The implications for HRD practitioners and
future research directions are discussed.

Introduction
From the Human Resource Development (HRD) perspective, the implementation of
policies and practices targeted at developing the employability of staff (Billett et al. 2011;
van Harten, Knies, and Leisink 2016; Veth et al. 2015) is viewed as a valuable strategy for
organizations to ensure employees’ continuous commitment and productivity (Fugate,
Kinicki, and Ashforth 2004) and to build capacity to facilitate organizational change
(Ellinger and Ellinger 2014). However, past research has focused on developing the
employability of existing and skilled workers, rather than the organizational commitment
to building employability in new workers – particularly young people transitioning into
employment. In a time where young people across most industrialized countries (OECD

CONTACT Katherine Moore k3.moore@qut.edu.au

© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
26 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

2018), including Australia (ABS 2018) where the current study was conducted, are at high
risk of unemployment and underemployment (Worth 2005), there is a growing need to
understand the extent to which organizations invest in developing the employability of
young workers to avoid long-term unemployment and social exclusion.
Definitions of employability have typically focused on ‘an individual’s ability to find
a job, retain a job, and move between jobs and/or industries should the need arise’
(Clarke and Patrickson 2008, 122). Individuals tend to perceive their own employability
according to the number of suitable and available job opportunities within their current
working environment, or within the external labour market (Berntson, Sverke, and
Marklund 2006; McQuaid and Lindsay 2005). More recent conceptualizations of employ-
ability, however, capture the new approach to career management that is emerging in the
contemporary employment landscape. With a focus on career mobility, it is argued that
organizational responsibility for providing employment security to develop employ-
ability is shifting to the individual employee to recognize opportunities, within and
outside their organizations, to develop their employability (Bernstrøm, Drange, and
Mamelund 2019). Arguably, this creates opportunities for casual and contingent workers
to seek avenues to develop their employability rather than pursue job security. Yet for
young people who have never worked before and who have limited education, opportu-
nities to develop their employability are limited.
Most of the research investigating the employability of young people has focused on
graduate employability (e.g. Kinash et al. 2016; Tomlinson 2007), labour market factors
(Crisp and Powell 2017; Worth 2005), or self-awareness of one’s potential employability
as a motivator towards individual career management and establishing a career identity
(Fugate, Kinicki, and Ashforth 2004). Some definitions of employability suggest young
people have a responsibility to recognize opportunities that will develop their employ-
ability (Vanhercke et al. 2014), while other research suggests that organizations recognize
a ‘new’ psychological contract, underpinned by mutual obligations wherein employers
take on the responsibility for managing and maintaining the personal employability of
their workers in anticipation of changing work contexts (Solberg and Dysvik 2015). Less
is known, however, about the extent to which organizations provide opportunities for
young people who do not have work experience or qualifications to develop their
employability (Smith and Comyn 2004). The current research adopts this focus by
investigating the extent to which organizations communicate to young, inexperienced
and unqualified job seekers their commitment to develop employability to assist these
individuals to build a platform of skills and experience from which they can develop their
employability and create their career identity.
Although a number of definitions of employability exist within the literature (Fugate,
Kinicki, and Ashforth 2004; Hillage and Pollard 1998; Rothwell and Arnold 2007), the
definition of employability for young people used in the current study is, ‘the human and
social capital required to gain, re-gain and sustain employment to develop one’s career
identity to ensure sustainable employment’. Human capital refers to personal factors that
may affect one’s chances of finding employment (McArdle et al. 2007). These ‘knowing-
how’ competencies (DeFillippi and Arthur 1994) include experience, training, skills and
knowledge. Social capital – or ‘knowing-whom’ competencies (DeFillippi and Arthur
1994) – reflects a more interpersonal aspect of employability and describes someone’s
social skills as well as the social network and support that they can draw upon to facilitate
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 27

re-employment success (McKee-Ryan et al. 2005). Career identity reflects ‘knowing-why’

competencies (DeFillippi and Arthur 1994), such as individual work values and motiva-
tion to work (Fugate, Kinicki, and Ashforth 2004). With regard to re-employment, career
identity reflects the centrality that unemployed people place on gaining employment,
which provides guidance in making decisions and establishing re-employment goals
(McArdle et al. 2007). Within the context of this study, sustainable employment is viewed
as the solution to youth unemployment.
HRD in the broad sense enhances learning and facilitates organizational change to
improve performance and build capacity at the individual, team and organizational levels
(Ellinger and Ellinger 2014; McLean and McLean 2001). Within the context of the
current study, HRD practices, such as training and development activities, have been
found to build human capital and be linked to employee perceptions of employability and
organizational performance and commitment (Veld, Semeijn, and van Vuuren 2015). Yet
in the time of boundaryless careers (Arthur and Rousseau 1996) and protean workers
(Hall and Mirvis 1995), it has been argued that by facilitating such developmental
activities, organizations risk losing their investment through staff turnover, particularly
of highly valued employees (De Cuyper and De Witte 2011). To date, however, insuffi-
cient empirical evidence exists to support this claim (Dries et al. 2014; Nelissen, Forrier,
and Verbruggen 2017).
Furthermore, employers are increasingly seeking new recruits with developed human
and social capital, who require minimal investment in training, as a means of maximizing
organizational viability and competitiveness (Taylor 2005). It could be argued that an
unintended consequence of organizations choosing not to provide opportunities for
young workers to develop their employability may be associated with the high youth
unemployment rates across most industrialized countries (OECD 2018). For example, at
the time of the data collection (March 2017), the overall youth unemployment rate – that
is, people aged under 25 years who were unemployed – was 13%. This rate was
considerably higher than the overall national unemployment rate of 5.8%. The disparity
between youth unemployment and overall unemployment rates is a continuing trend in
Australia (ABS 2018).
Although HRD practices focusing on the development of employability in current staff
has received some attention in the literature (e.g. van Harten, Knies, and Leisink 2016),
there is limited research focusing on HRD strategies for young job seekers who have
limited previous experience and qualifications. Hence, there is scope to investigate the
extent to which organizations are committed to developing employability in newly
appointed young workers. The current study draws on the notion of employability
becoming a mutual responsibility of both organizations and individuals, the common
HRD practices that have been found to develop employability, and signalling theory
(Spence 1973) to explain the use of key employability HRD practices in job advertise-
ments to answer the question: ‘To what extent do organizations communicate their
commitment to developing the “employability” of young, inexperienced job seekers via
job advertisements?’
The article begins with an overview of the changing scope of the psychological contract
within the context of career management and orientations to include the organization’s
commitment to employability development, followed by a review of the literature revealing
common HRD practices used to develop employability within the organization and to build
28 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

career mobility. Signalling theory (Spence 1973) is outlined as the theoretical framework
underpinning the use of job advertisements as cues that organizations use to demonstrate
organizational commitment to employability development activities that are sought by
young people. The methodology and results of cross-tabulations and statistically significant
differences in the presence of key employability terms across job classifications and work
types are then reported. Finally, the theoretical contributions and practical implications of
the research for HRD and organizations are presented, with the limitations of the current
study and future research directions concluding the article.

Organizational commitment to employability development for young

people
Recently, the question of the organization’s role in developing employability in employ-
ees has been addressed in the literature. For instance, despite the focus of individual
responsibility in developing and managing one’s employability (Bernstrøm, Drange, and
Mamelund 2019; Brown, Hesketh, and Williams 2003), and the reduced capacity of
organizations to offer long-term employment security to their staff (Clarke and
Patrickson 2008), it has been suggested that there is a need for a shift in the nature of
the psychological contract within organizations to include a mutual obligation and
responsibility for employees’ employability (Clarke 2008; Garavan 1999). Garavan
(1999), for example, suggests that ‘employability’ as opposed to ‘employment security’
has increasingly become the ‘new’ form of psychological contract between employers and
employees. This is reiterated in the literature on career management, which stresses the
need for sustainability over security (Van der Heijden and De Vos 2015). Further,
acknowledging the emergence and prevalence of boundaryless careers in the current
landscape of work, it has been argued that organizations still have an ethical obligation to
assist their employees to remain employable in the external labour market (Van Buren III
2003). As organizations are increasingly seeing the value of providing employability
development opportunities for their existing staff, there is indeed scope to specifically
target employability development for young, inexperienced and unqualified job seekers.
Such organizational commitment to providing relevant HRD practices for young work-
ers would be a potential solution to the persistent trend of high youth unemployment
across many countries.

HRD practices for employability development

Many employers demand young job applicants, particularly graduates, to demonstrate
previous work experience (McMurray et al. 2016; Moore 2019). However, this poses
a conundrum for young people with no experience or formal qualifications as they
transition into the workforce. With reference to the definition of employability used in
this study, young job seekers recognize that human capital acquisition is fundamental to
employability (Worth 2003). Despite other avenues available to young people to build
human capital, such as training courses, many rely on organizations to offer employment
opportunities that do not have a prerequisite of demonstrated work experience. Such
opportunities are often termed entry-level, junior or school-leaver jobs. Furthermore, as
a positive relationship between a person’s perceived employability and their intention to
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 29

learn and develop has been found (Mallon and Walton 2005), it is likely that young job
seekers would be looking for employment with organizations that will offer not only
training but other career developmental opportunities that will develop their employability.
Recent research has highlighted the importance of social capital, in the form of
networks, in developing employability (Creed and Gagliardi 2015; McArdle et al. 2007)
and career mobility (Rodrigues, Butler, and Guest 2019). As young people – particularly
disadvantaged youth with few family and friends – who are transitioning into employ-
ment are likely to have limited social capital, they will view networking opportunities, in
addition to employment, as a means to create social capital that will develop their
employability. Finally, career identity has been shown to impact self-perceived employ-
ability (Nazar and van der Heijden 2012) and adaptability (McArdle et al. 2007) to
potentially lead to long-term employment.
From the organizational perspective, HRD systems have increasingly focused on train-
ing and development programmes, career development, and mentoring and coaching
activities to manage and promote organizational talent that will ensure organizational
and individual workers’ objectives are aligned (Nilsson and Ellstrom 2012). In their study,
Smith and Comyn (2004) examined processes by which 12 Australian companies devel-
oped employability in their young novice workers, typically school leavers. Employers
typically used training, buddy and mentoring systems, and task rotation to develop
employability for young workers. Hence, in the context of this study, training, competency
development, career development, mentoring, coaching and networking activities have
been identified as key HRD activities to build employability for young workers.

Training
Formal training activities have been found to have a positive effect on the employability of
employees (Groot and Maassen van den Brink 2000) and, in particular, low-skilled workers
(Sanders and Andries 2004). However, other studies suggest that providing firm- or product-
specific skill training to employees improves their employability within an organization but
does not necessarily improve their future career mobility (Sanders and Andries 2004).

Competency development
Competency development refers to activities that are aimed at maintaining or enhancing
employees’ functional, learning and career competencies (Forrier and Sels 2003).
Employee participation in competency development initiatives as well as perceived
organizational support for competency development are positively associated with work-
ers’ perceptions of employability (De Vos, De Hauw, and Van der Heijden 2011).
Employees’ perceived organizational investment in employee development has also
been found to be a strong predictor of job satisfaction (Fallon and Rice 2015).

Career development
Despite the boundaryless career or protean worker orientation (Arthur and Rousseau
1996; Hall 2004), the word ‘career’ has arguably become synonymous with sustained
employment (De Vos, De Hauw, and Van der Heijden 2011; Martini and Cavenago 2017;
30 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

Olson and Shultz 2013; Van der Heijden et al. 2009). Reference to the word ‘career’ in
a job advertisement would signal organizational commitment to providing opportunities
for young people to develop their career identity.

Mentoring, coaching and networking

Activities such as mentoring, coaching and networking have been found to build employ-
ees’ social capital and internal and external employability. Mentoring, whereby a new and
inexperienced employee is paired with a more experienced employee, has been found to
improve the employability of young workers who are new to the workforce (Smith and
Comyn 2004). Similarly, employees who have been coached by their managers or super-
visors have increased their skills and performance, and thus their employability (Egan
et al. 2014). Building social capital through networking opportunities has also been found
to improve employees’ external employability by providing a platform from which to
build external and future employment contacts (Varekamp et al. 2015), and the perceived
employability of graduates (Batistic and Tymon 2017).
Based on the research above, the signals of the organization’s commitment to offering
young, inexperienced, and unqualified new employees to develop their employability in
this study are conceptualized as HRD practices that organizations commit to, including
training, development, career planning and development, mentoring, coaching and
networking.

Signalling commitment to employability development through job

advertisements
This study draws upon signalling theory (Spence 1973) to consider how organizations
communicate their commitment to developing employability, as defined in this study, to
young, inexperienced and unqualified job seekers. According to signalling theory (Spence
1973), job advertisements serve as a signal to applicants about the organization’s position
on providing opportunities for young people to develop their employability. Indeed, the
signalling effect has been found to be strong in this early stage of the recruitment process
(Rynes, Bretz, and Gerhart 1991). In line with this theory, when job seekers do not have
all the information about a job or organization, they will draw inferences based on cues
within job advertisements (Acarlar and Bilgiç 2012; Gomes and Neves 2011). Hence,
young, inexperienced and unqualified job seekers may focus on cues relating to devel-
oping their employability, specifically human and social capital, and future career
identity.
Signalling theory has been used in other studies utilizing job advertisements as the
data source for identifying role competencies (Poba-Nzaou, Uwizeyemungu, and Clarke
2018) and aligning organizational values (De Cooman and Pepermans 2012). Unlike
other studies, however, the current study focuses only on organizations’ actions to
intentionally communicate their commitment to developing employability as concep-
tualized through the key employability words identified. The study does not empirically
test the action of the signal receiver, the young job seeker, for example, actually applying
for the job.
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 31

Method
Sample
The sampling frame for the study was job advertisements that targeted young job
seekers with minimal or no work experience, which were posted during one calendar
month. The month of March 2017 (31 calendar days) was chosen as the data
collection period, as this is the first month in a calendar year that is typically
representative of uninflated job advertisements for casual positions in hospitality
and retail industries during the Christmas season. The data source was the
Australian job search site, seek.com.au. Using purposive sampling, this job search
site was chosen due its high profile as being Australia’s number one employment
marketplace. Although there are other employment platforms in Australia, seek.com.
au was an appropriate choice as the website requires employers to pay $275+ GST to
post job advertisements. Financial engagement strengthens the organization’s com-
mitment. The location for the search was set as Australia-wide, thus included the
states of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland
and Tasmania, as well as the two territories, the Northern Territory and Australian
Capital Territory. Over the 31 days of data collection, there were 149,206 jobs in total
advertised Australia-wide.
To identify the job advertisements that would be suitable for inexperienced young
people, the first search criterion was set as jobs paying between $0 and $20 per hour as
this would be the range for a junior position (Australian Government Fair Work
Ombudsman 2017). This search revealed 13,175 jobs Australia-wide. Second, the search
words ‘junior’, ‘no experience’ and ‘entry level’ were used; 1,279 advertisements met these
criteria. Finally, these advertisements were reviewed and the jobs that were not suitable
for young people who did not have a university degree, and any duplicate advertisements,
were removed. The final sample used for the analysis consisted of 1,256 job advertise-
ments across Australia during the data collection period. The number of jobs advertised
within each state was: New South Wales – 513; Victoria – 283; South Australia – 68;
Western Australia – 65; Queensland – 284; Tasmania – 15; the Northern Territory – 4;
and the Australian Capital Territory – 24.

Data analysis
Content analysis (Gall, Gall, and Borg 2010) was used to determine the frequency of the
key employability words as they appeared in the final sample of the job advertisements.
This type of analysis has been used in other studies utilizing job advertisements as the
data source to identify the frequency of transferable skills (Bennett 2002), graduate skills
and attributes desired by employers (McArthur et al. 2017). Using the data analysis
software package NVivo 11, the first step in the analysis was to code each job advertise-
ment in the final sample according to job classification. Within the seek.com.au job
search website there are several job classifications that advertisers choose to best repre-
sent the industry or sector in which the advertised job is performed. Given the diversity of
job titles used for similar types of jobs, this method of coding was deemed to be an
accurate means of grouping the jobs. Examples of job titles within each classification are
presented in Table 1. Each job was also coded according to the work type assigned in the
 32

Table 1. Examples of job titles across job classifications.

Aged/Child/ Customer Labouring/Process/
Administration/Office Health Care Service/Sales Hospitality Factory Tech/ Graphics Trade Ware- housing Other
Receptionist/Office Dental Assistant Customer Service Gelato Scoopers Car Detailer Information Technology 1st Year Entry Level Store Drive with
Admin Childcare & Sales Junior Cafe All Food Production Trainee Apprentice Person Uber
Accounts/ Junior Trainee Casual Service Rounder Workers – Ongoing Entry Level Support Hairdresser Casual Junior Basketball
Administration & Early Consultant Referee
K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

Junior Casuals Desk Engineer 1st Year Warehouse

Office Support Childhood Entry Level Restaurant All Assembly Worker Entry level Electro- Mobile Plant Hand Mystery
Accounts & Traineeship Telesales Rounder Farm Fencing technology Jobs Mechanic Junior Shoppers
Administration Unqualified Guest Service Junior Wait Staff Position Trainee Junior Aspiring Warehouse
Assistant Junior Dental Agent, Front Junior Food and Gardening Labourer Graphic Prepress Junior Trade Assistant
Accounts Assistant Nurse Office Beverage Junior – Signs Junior Tech Room IT Assistant Store person
Accounts Payable – Unqualified Junior Sales Attendant General Hand Assistant Tiling Pick/Pack
Entry Level Childcare Trainee Fast food service Labourers & Process Telecommunications Apprentice Warehousing
Administration Educator Pharmacy Workers Trainee Automotive Traineeship
Clerk Leisure Assistants Car Washer/Yard Trades
Administrator/ Services Retail & Assistant Assistant
Service Industry- Trainee Customer
Junior Level Service
Business Sales Assistant
Administration Sales
Traineeship Appointment
Data Entry & Consultant
Support Assistant
Junior
Administration
Assistant
Junior Receptionist
Office Junior
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 33

advertisement: full-time, part-time, casual, contract/fixed term or independent

contractor.
The key employability words that were drawn from the review of the HRD literature –
‘training’, ‘competency development’, ‘career development’, ‘mentoring’, ‘coaching’ and ‘net-
working’ – were then identified and coded within each job advertisement. When the key
employability word was present, and the context of its use was related to the opportunity to
develop employability, the job advertisement was coded as ‘yes’. For example, ‘onsite training
will be provided’, ‘personal development opportunities’, ‘career progression opportunities’,
“continuous support and mentoring”, ’one-on-one coaching’ and ‘networking with like-
minded individuals’. If the key word was either not present, or the usage was not relevant to
employability, the advertisement was coded as ‘no’. For example, job advertisements stating
the term ‘product training’ were not considered as skill training, or if the word was used to
describe an aspect of the job or work context, such as ‘design, development and project
management team’, the advertisement would be coded ‘no’.
To overcome the validity issues associated with this type of analysis (Gall, Gall, and
Borg 2010), each incidence of coding was checked by a second researcher, using latent
interpretation, to ensure that the coded data were relevant to the research question; data
that were found not to be relevant were deleted from the analysis. The second step in the
data analysis used SPSS Version 25 to conduct descriptive analysis and cross-tabulations
to determine statistically significant differences in the presence of key employability
terms across job classifications and work types.

Results
The numbers of jobs advertised according to job classification and work type are
displayed in Table 2. The largest proportion of entry-level jobs were from the
Administration/Office classification (39%), with the least amount of entry-level jobs
being related to Hospitality (2%). Sixty-five per cent of the 1,256 advertised jobs were full-
time, 8% were part-time (less than 38 hours per week), 7% were fixed-term contracts, 6%
were casual and 14% of the advertisements were inviting applicants to become indepen-
dent contractors. Examples of the independent contracting jobs included Uber drivers,
mystery shoppers and community fund raisers, all requiring the applicants to provide an
Australian Business Number, and many being paid on a commission-only basis. Cross-
tabulations were then performed to determine the extent to which the key employability
word appeared in the job advertisements, according to job classification and work type,
and Pearson chi-square tests were also performed to determine statistically significant
differences.

Training
The first key employability word analysed was ‘training’. There was a significant differ-
ence between ‘training provided’ and ‘no training provided’ found across the job classi-
fications (χ2(8) = 32.15; p < 0.001), whereby only 40% (n = 503) of the job advertisements
referred to offering training for the job. Of these jobs, the Administration/Office classi-
fication accounted for the highest proportion (34.4%, n = 173) of advertisements that
would provide training for the job, and the Hospitality classification accounted for the
 34
K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

Table 2. Number of entry-level jobs advertised according to job classification and work type.
Job Classification
Labouring/
Admin/ Customer Service/ Process/ Tech/ Ware-
Work Type Office Aged, Child, Health Care Sales Hospitality Factory Graphics Trade housing Other Total
Full-Time 390 43 132 4 46 39 115 39 9 817
Part-Time 47 8 25 6 3 2 3 1 7 102
Casual 23 4 19 15 7 0 0 3 3 74
Fixed-term Contracts 28 1 38 1 3 4 7 5 1 88
Independent Contractor 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 100 175
TOTAL 488 56 289 26 59 45 125 48 120 1256
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 35

lowest proportion (1.6%, n = 8). Regarding the former finding, 100 of the total jobs
advertised (N = 1256) were traineeships, and 55 of these traineeships were in the
Administration/Office classification. Regarding the latter finding, in the Hospitality clas-
sification, there were only 26 jobs in total advertised within this classification so approxi-
mately one third of these jobs offered training. The overall small number of hospitality
jobs advertised could be a consequence of the recruitment strategies used in the industry
as a whole; for example, word of mouth and advertisements for jobs placed at the
premises.
Focusing on the proportion of advertisements that offered training within each job
classification, as presented in Figure 1, both Aged/Child/Health Care (53.6%) and
Customer Service/Sales (48.8%) classifications were significantly higher than expected,
and the proportion of advertisements that offered training was significantly lower than
expected in the Administration/Office (35.5%) and Other classifications (25.8%). In
relation to the Administration/Office classification, 17 of the 55 advertisements for
traineeships previously stated did not specifically state that training would be provided.
This was primarily due to a third-party recruitment organization conducting the recruit-
ment for the organization. With regard to the Other classification, the latter finding may
be explained by the number of independent contracting jobs, such as Uber drivers and
mystery shoppers, being included in this category, and the associated expectation that
independent contractors do not require on-the-job training. Casual (3.8%) and full-time
(71.8%) jobs accounted for the lowest and highest proportions respectively of the
positions that were advertised to provide training. There was a significant difference
between ‘training provided’ and ‘no training provided’ across the work types
(χ2(4) = 18.68; p = 0.001). The number of full-time jobs that advertised training was
significantly higher than those that did not mention training. However, there were

Figure 1. Key employability words advertised across job classifications.

36 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

significantly less casual and independent contractor jobs that advertised training than
expected.

Competency development
The second key employability word analysed was ‘development’, specifically in the
context of development opportunities available. A significant difference between the
word ‘development’ appearing in the advertisements and not appearing across the job
classifications was found (χ2(8) = 47.76; p < 0.001), insofar as only 20% (n = 251) of the
advertisements specifically stated the organization would provide developmental oppor-
tunities. Comparable to the findings of the analysis of ‘training’, the Administration/
Office classification accounted for the highest proportion (38.9%, n = 103) of advertise-
ments that referred to developmental opportunities, suggesting that organizations offer-
ing jobs in this classification are committed to and value training and development
activities. The Other classification accounted for the lowest proportion, with only one
advertisement using the key word (and iterations of) ‘development’. As the majority of
positions advertised in this classification were for independent contractors, such as Uber,
it is assumed there is little room for upward mobility within these jobs.
The Aged/Child/Health Care classification had the second highest proportion of
advertisements stating development opportunities (32%) and the jobs advertised in the
Customer Service/Sales classification (25.6%) were also significantly higher than expected.
This finding suggests that there may be more scope for development opportunities for
organizations within these industries, placing less emphasis on job-specific skill training
and more focus on overall development of staff. There was a significant difference
between the number of advertisements using the term ‘development’ (or not) across
the work types (χ2(4) = 25.59; p < 0.001). Full-time jobs were the most likely to feature
development in the advertisements, representing 76% (n = 190) of the total job adver-
tisements with development opportunities, and the number of these job advertisements
were significantly higher than expected at the .05 level. There were significantly less
independent contractor jobs that advertised development opportunities than expected at
the .05 level.

Career development
The third key employability word analysed was ‘career’, in the context of the job leading
to future career opportunities – either internal or external – to the advertising organiza-
tion. There was a significant difference between the term appearing (22%, n = 275) and
not appearing (78%, n = 981) in job advertisements across the job classifications
(χ2(8) = 31.81; p < 0.001). The highest proportion of jobs with ‘career’ mentioned was
in the Administration/Office classification (37.1%, n = 102), and the lowest proportion
(1.8%) was accounted for by both Hospitality and Other classifications. Figure 1 shows
that the Aged/Child/Health Care classification had the highest proportion of jobs refer-
ring to ‘career’ and the number of jobs was significantly higher than expected, at the .05
level. There was a significant difference between the number of advertisements in which
‘career or development’ appeared (or not) across the work types (χ2(4) = 40.92; p
< 0.001). As presented in Figure 2, the highest proportion of jobs mentioning ‘career’
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 37

Figure 2. Key employability words advertised across types of employment.

were full-time jobs (78.9%, n = 217) and the number of these job advertisements was
significantly higher than expected at the .05 level. As in the case of development, there
were significantly less independent contractor jobs that advertised development oppor-
tunities than expected.
Further cross-tabulations were performed to identify the frequencies of words used in
combination, or not, across the job classifications and work types. Pearson chi-square
tests were not performed due to assumptions not being met for this analysis. Table 3
displays the numbers and proportions of the key employability words of ‘training’,
‘development’ and ‘career’. A key finding is that the majority of job advertisements (n
= 700, 55.7%) contain at least one of these three key employability terms. More specifi-
cally, 73.2% (n = 41) of job advertisements in the Aged/Child/Health Care classification
used at least one key term, the highest being only ‘training’ (26.8%). Jobs with full-time
work hours (61.7%, n = 504) also used the key terms more than other work types. The
jobs that were classified as Other were least likely to use any terms, as were the jobs
advertising for independent contractors (37.7%, n = 66).

Mentoring, coaching and networking

The other key employability HRD practices that were analysed were the words ‘mentoring’,
‘coaching’ and ‘networking’. ‘Mentoring’ appeared in 56, or 4.0% of total job advertise-
ments, with the highest proportion (39%, n = 22) being in the Administration/Office
classification and full-time (78%, n = 43) working hours. The term ‘coaching’ appeared
in 29 job advertisements, or 2% of the total sample, with 27 (93%) of these jobs being in the
Customer Service/Sales classification. ‘Coaching’ was most represented (n = 17, 59%) in the
 38

Table 3. Cross-tabulation data for the key employability word of ‘career’ in job advertisements according to job classification and work type.
Key Employability Terms
No Key Training Development Career Training and Training and Development and Training, Development
Terms only only only Development Career Career and Career
n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) Total
Job Administration/ 225 (46.1) 97 (19.9) 33 (6.8) 33 (6.8) 31 (6.4) 30 (6.1) 24 (4.9) 15 (3.1) 488
K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

Classification Office
Aged/Child/Health 15 (26.8) 15 (26.8) 3 (5.4) 3 (5.4) 4 (7.1) 5 (8.9) 5 (8.9) 6 (10.7) 56
Care
Customer Service/ 103 (35.6) 75 (26) 15 (5.2) 23 (8) 23 (8) 14 (4.8) 7 (2.4) 29 (10) 289
Sales
Hospitality 12 (46.2) 3 (11.5) 3 (11.5) 2 (7.7) 3 (11.5) 1 (3.8) 1 (3.8) 1 (3.8) 26
Labouring/Process/ 26 (44.1) 12 (20.3) 3 (5.1) 6 (10.2) 1 (1.7) 7 (11.9) 0 4 (6.8) 59
Factory
Technology/ 17 (37.8) 9 (20) 2 (4.4) 5 (11.1) 6 (13.3) 2 (4.4) 0 4 (8.9) 45
Graphics
Trade 54 (43.2) 31 (24.8) 2 (1.6) 10 (8) 7 (5.6) 14 (11.2) 1 (0.8) 6 (4.8) 125
Warehousing 19 (39.6) 10 (20.8) 6 (12.5) 5 (10.4) 1 (2.1) 3 (6.3) 1 (2.1) 3 (6.3) 48
Other 85 (70.8) 30 (25) 0 3 (2.5) 0 1 (0.8) 1 (0.8) 0 120
Total 556 (44.3) 282 67 (5.3) 90 (7.2) 76 (6.1) 77 (6.1) 40 (3.2) 68 (5.4) 1256
(22.5)
Work Type Full-Time 313 (38.3) 183 (22.4) 47 (5.8) 62 (7.6) 57 (7.0) 69 (8.4) 34 (4.2) 52 (6.4) 817
Part-Time 52 (51.0) 22 (21.6) 7 (6.9) 6 (5.9) 5 (4.9) 1 (1.0) 4 (3.9) 5 (4.9) 102
Casual 45 (60.8) 12 (16.2) 3 (4.1) 6 (8.1) 2 (2.7) 2 (2.7) 1 (1.4) 3 (4.1) 74
Contract/Fixed term 37 (42.0) 20 (22.7) 9 (10.2) 9 (10.2) 2 (2.3) 4 (4.5) 1 (1.1) 6 (6.8) 88
Independent 109 (62.3) 45 (25.7) 1 (0.6) 7 (4.0) 10 (5.7) 1 (0.6) 0 2 (1.1) 175
Contractor
Total 556 (44.3) 282 67 (5.3) 90 (7.2) 76 (6.1) 77 (6.1) 40 (3.2) 68 (5.4) 1256
(22.5)
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 39

jobs with the work type of independent contractor. Finally, ‘networking’ appeared in 32 job
advertisements, or 2.5% of total jobs, with the highest proportion (84%, n = 27) being in the
Customer Service classification and independent contractor work type (n = 18, 56%).

Discussion and conclusion

The aim of the study was to investigate the extent to which organizations communicate
their commitment to developing the ‘employability’ of young, inexperienced job seekers via
job advertisements. As this demographic group of job seekers has generally been neglected
in both the employability and HRD research areas, and most industrialized countries
experience high youth unemployment, the study addresses this gap and provides preli-
minary data, in the Australian context, from which future research can build.
Drawing on the employability, HRD, career development and youth employment
literature, key employability HRD practices that would communicate or signal organiza-
tional commitment to developing young workers’ employability were conceptualized as
training, competency development, career development, mentoring, coaching and net-
working opportunities. Data analysis revealed that over half of the entry-level jobs
advertised within one calendar month included one or more key employability terms
to signal to inexperienced job seekers that the organization was committed to developing
their employability. Yet the extent to which the advertisements included the terms varied
across job classification and work type.
Overall, investment in developing human capital through training was the most
common HRD practice advertised and arguably the most fundamental HRD activity an
organization can provide to develop a young worker’s employability. Reference to
developing competencies and careers appeared less frequently across each job classifica-
tion and work type; yet these HRD activities were present, suggesting a level of commit-
ment, albeit less than training, to developing competency and career identity in young
workers. HRD activities relating to developing social capital, such as networking,
appeared significantly less often, suggesting organizations take less responsibility in
developing this component of employability for young workers. This is an area upon
which HRD practitioners should focus, as the link between social capital and employ-
ability is well established (Fugate, Kinicki, and Ashforth 2004; Varekamp et al. 2015).
For example, in line with the strength of weak ties theory (Granovetter 1973; Seibert,
Kraimer, and Liden 2001), a recent study by Batistic and Tymon (2017) explored the
relationship between social networks and perceived employability in full-time students,
finding that access to resources and information was an integral component in develop-
ing social networks. Organizations could focus on HRD activities that build social capital
through facilitating the creation of weak ties with influential associates and groups, by
providing formal and informal opportunities for introducing young workers to organi-
zational and industry contacts, outside of their immediate network of co-workers, with
the aim to increase their social resources and to develop their long-term employability.
The jobs within the Aged/Child/Health Care classification represented the highest use
of any, or all, of the key employability terms for entry-level positions. This may be
explained by the current growth trend in the healthcare sector in Australia (Australian
Government Department of Jobs and Small Business 2018). Specifically, the healthcare
sector has the largest projected employment growth rate (25%) in Australia for the period
40 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

2018 to 2022. These findings indicate that this industry shows great opportunities for
young people to develop their employability and future career identities. Similarly,
a comparatively high proportion of jobs advertised in the Customer Service/Sales classi-
fication signalled commitment to employability development opportunities. This finding
is relevant for young job seekers as this industry is likely to attract younger workers. This
finding also suggests that employers within this industry may be more receptive to the
‘new’ psychological contract as evidenced in their demonstrated commitment to devel-
oping employability (Garavan 1999; Solberg and Dysvik 2015).
Surprisingly, although the highest number of entry-level jobs advertised were from the
Administration/Office classification, these organizations were least likely to include any
employability terms in their advertisement following those in the Hospitality classifica-
tion. This suggests that organizations advertising jobs under this classification are less
willing to invest in the employability of young job seekers. Given the breadth of job titles
that were included under this classification, this preliminary finding of this study high-
lights the need for further research to explore the actual HR and HRD practices of the
advertising organizations. The low frequency of advertised HRD practices in the
Hospitality classification was not surprising, but concerning, as this industry has a high
demand for young people and high staff turnover, making organizations in this industry
instrumental in developing young people’s employability. A high proportion of jobs
advertised in the Other classification included jobs that are typical of the gig economy,
such as Uber drivers and mystery shoppers. Given these jobs were independent con-
tracting jobs, a different type of employment relationship exists. This is yet another
avenue for future research that has only recently begun to be investigated (Lo Presti,
Pluviano, and Briscoe 2018).
The findings revealed that organizations that were advertising full-time jobs were
more likely to signal a commitment to developing the employability of the successful
applicant. This finding aligns with previous research whereby temporary employees are
less likely to receive employer-funded training (Forrier and Sels 2003), despite the
positive correlation between training and organizational commitment and perceived
employability of temporary workers (Chambel and Sobral 2011). Yet as young people’s
first jobs are likely to be casual or temporary, and given the factors that are typically
associated with young workers, such as under-employment, this finding is of particular
concern for this cohort (Matthews, Delfabbro, and Winefield 2015). For those organiza-
tions that are committed to developing employability in young workers, they should
consider advertising their commitment to invest in HRD activities for casual/temporary
positions.
There are two main contributions of this study. The first is its contribution to the HRD
and employability literature by addressing the gap in the literature concerning organiza-
tions’ responsibilities to provide opportunities for young job seekers to develop their
employability in order to achieve long-term economic security. The findings suggest that,
despite the growing trend of individual responsibility for developing employability,
organizations do signal their commitment to developing employability in young, inex-
perienced job seekers, albeit primarily for full-time jobs. This also provides empirical
evidence to contribute to the ongoing debate of the supply and demand-side responsi-
bilities of employability (Gore 2005). Hence, there are opportunities for future research
to develop this concept. The use of a longitudinal methodology to measure the
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 41

relationship between the organizational intent of providing HRD practices to develop

employability and the actual employability outcomes for young employees would further
contribute to this body of research and would inform HR recruitment and development
practices across a variety of contextual situations.
The second contribution is the practical implications for HRD practices. Previous
research has linked HRD practices of training and development activities and career
development programmes with sustainable employability of their workers, leading to
both a competitive advantage for the organization and career success for the individual
(Fugate, Kinicki, and Ashforth 2004). Commitment to developing employability is
viewed as a corporate social responsibility activity that can increase the organization’s
competitive advantage (Ybema, Van Vuuren, and Karen 2017). Therefore, strategically
aligning HR recruitment activities aimed at young, inexperienced job seekers with other
existing HRD goals will support overall organizational performance. The findings of this
study highlight opportunities for organizations to use the job advertisement as a means of
signalling organizational commitment to developing ‘employability’ in staff, despite
being unable to promise long-term employment security.
The study has two limitations, related primarily to the data collection, that could be
addressed in future to develop this line of research. First, the data were collected over
a relatively brief period of time, being one calendar month, and, as previously mentioned,
did not include outcomes of the recruitment process for each advertised job. Extending the
data collection period and exploring the temporal relationship between the job advertise-
ment and an applicant’s recruitment in future studies could provide more opportunities to
reveal trends and patterns that develop over time and across job classifications. The second
limitation concerns the primary data source from which the advertisements were selected.
Although the recruitment website used (seek.com.au) is Australia’s largest online job
posting site, there are a number of other sites gaining popularity; for example, Indeed.
com and the Jobs Australia website, monster.com. Further, it is recognized that many jobs
are often not advertised through these types of platforms, with employers favouring
LinkedIn postings or word of mouth and networking. As previously stated, this study has
provided a platform from which future research can expand the sampling frame to include
these other types of recruitment advertising avenues.
The changing nature of employment relationships continues to impact HRD practices
within organizations. Organizations are now recognizing a ‘new’ psychological contract,
underpinned by mutual obligations wherein employers take on the responsibility of
developing their individual workers in anticipation of changing work contexts, and
employees take responsibility for managing and maintaining their personal employability
(Solberg and Dysvik 2015). This perspective has implications for how organizations
engage with young workers to develop their employability. With reference to the defini-
tion of employability used in the current study, organizations are encouraged to imple-
ment HRD strategies to develop human and social capital in young workers while they
formulate their career identity to ensure sustainable employment. By signalling to the
external labour market that the organization is committed to investing in developing the
employability of young, inexperienced and unqualified job seekers, the organization will
gain recognition for taking a proactive approach to addressing the persistent issue of
youth unemployment.
42 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID
Katherine Moore http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4176-9927
Maria Hameed Khan http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0781-4675

References
Acarlar, G., and R. Bilgiç. 2012. “Factors Influencing Applicant Willingness to Apply for the
Advertised Job Opening: The Mediational Role of Credibility, Satisfaction and Attraction.” The
International Journal of Human Resource Management 24 (1): 1–28.
Arthur, M. B., and D. M. Rousseau. 1996. The Boundaryless Career: A New Employment Principle
for A New Organizational Era. New York: Oxford University Press.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 2018. Labour Force, Australia, 6202.0. Canberra: ABS. http://
www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6202.0Jun%202018?OpenDocument
Australian Government Department of Jobs and Small Business. 2018. “Australian Jobs.” https://
docs.jobs.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/australianjobs2018.pdf
Australian Government Fair Work Ombudsman 2017. “Minimum Wages.” https://www.fairwork.
gov.au/pay/minimum-wages
Batistic, S., and A. Tymon. 2017. “Networking Behaviour, Graduate Employability: A Social
Capital Perspective.” Education & Training 59 (4): 374–388.
Bennett, R. 2002. “Employers’ Demands for Personal Transferable Skills in Graduates: A Content
Analysis of 1000 Job Advertisements and an Associated Empirical Study.” Journal of Vocational
Education & Training 54 (4): 457–475.
Bernstrøm, V. H., I. Drange, and S.-E. Mamelund. 2019. “Employability as an Alternative to Job
Security.” Personnel Review 48 (1): 234–248.
Berntson, E., M. Sverke, and S. Marklund. 2006. “Predicting Perceived Employability: Human
Capital or Labour Market Opportunities?” Economic and Industrial Democracy 27 (2):
223–244.
Billett, S., D. Dymock, G. Johnson, and G. Martin. 2011. “Overcoming the Paradox of Employers’
Views about Older Workers.” The International Journal of Human Resource Management 22
(6): 1248–1261.
Brown, P., A. Hesketh, and S. Williams. 2003. “Employability in a Knowledge-Driven Economy.”
Journal of Education and Work 16 (2): 107–126.
Chambel, M. J., and F. Sobral. 2011. “Training Is an Investment with Return in Temporary
Workers: A Social Exchange Perspective.” Career Development International 16 (2):
161–177.
Clarke, M. 2008. “Understanding and Managing Employability in Changing Career Contexts.”
Journal of European Industrial Training 32 (4): 258–284.
Clarke, M., and M. Patrickson. 2008. “The New Covenant of Employability.” Employee Relations
30 (2): 121–141.
Creed, P. A., and R.-E. Gagliardi. 2015. “Career Compromise, Career Distress, and Perceptions of
Employability: The Moderating Roles of Social Capital and Core Self-Evaluations.” Journal of
Career Assessment 23 (1): 20–34.
Crisp, R., and R. Powell. 2017. “Young People and UK Labour Market Policy: A Critique of
‘employability’ as A Tool for Understanding Youth Unemployment.” Urban Studies 54 (8):
1784–1807.
De Cooman, R., and R. Pepermans. 2012. “Portraying Fitting Values in Job Advertisements.”
Personnel Review 41 (2): 216–232.
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 43

De Cuyper, N., and H. De Witte. 2011. “The Management Paradox.” Personnel Review 40 (2): 152–172.
De Vos, A., S. De Hauw, and B. I. J. M. Van der Heijden. 2011. “Competency Development and Career
Success: The Mediating Role of Employability.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 79 (2): 438–447.
DeFillippi, R. J., and M. B. Arthur. 1994. “The Boundaryless Career: A Competency-based
Perspective.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 15 (4): 307–324.
Dries, N., A. Forrier, A. De Vos, and R. Pepermans. 2014. “Self-Perceived Employability,
Organization-Rated Potential, and the Psychological Contract.” Journal of Managerial
Psychology 29 (5): 565–581.
Egan, T., R. G. Hamlin, A. D. Ellinger, T. Egan, and S. Kim. 2014. “Coaching, HRD, and Relational
Richness: Putting the Pieces Together.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 16 (2): 242–257.
Ellinger, A., and A. D. Ellinger. 2014. “Leveraging Human Resource Development Expertise to
Improve Supply Chain Managers’ Skills and Competencies.” European Journal of Training and
Development 38 (1/2): 118–135.
Fallon, B. J., and S. M. Rice. 2015. “Investment in Staff Development within an Emergency Services
Organisation: Comparing Future Intention of Volunteers and Paid Employees.” The
International Journal of Human Resource Management 26 (4): 485–500.
Forrier, A., and L. Sels. 2003. “Temporary Employment and Employability: Training
Opportunities and Efforts of Temporary and Permanent Employees in Belgium.” Work,
Employment & Society 17 (4): 641–666.
Fugate, M., A. J. Kinicki, and B. E. Ashforth. 2004. “Employability: A Psycho-Social Construct, Its
Dimensions, and Applications.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 65 (1): 14–38.
Gall, M. D., J. P. Gall, and W. R. Borg. 2010. Applying Educational Research: How to Read, Do, and
Use Research to Solve Problems of Practice. 6th ed. Boston: Pearson.
Garavan, T. N. 1999. “Employability, the Emerging New Deal?” Journal of European Industrial
Training 23 (1). doi:10.1108/jeit.1999.00323aaa.001.
Gomes, D., and J. Neves. 2011. “Organizational Attractiveness and Prospective Applicants’
Intentions to Apply.” Personnel Review 40 (6): 684–699.
Gore, T. 2005. “Extending Employability or Solving Employers’ Recruitment Problems? Demand-
Led Approaches as an Instrument of Labour Market Policy.” Urban Studies 42 (2): 341–353.
Granovetter, M. S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78 (6):
1360–1380.
Groot, W., and H. Maassen van den Brink. 2000. “Overeducation in the Labor Market: A
Meta-Analysis.” Economics of Education Review 19 (2): 149–158.
Hall, D. T. 2004. “The Protean Career: A Quarter-Century Journey.” Journal of Vocational
Behavior 65 (1): 1–13.
Hall, D. T., and P. H. Mirvis. 1995. “The New Career Contract: Developing the Whole Person at
Midlife and Beyond.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 47: 269–289.
Hillage, J., and E. Pollard. 1998. Employability: Developing a Framework for Policy Analysis.
Research Brief No. 85. London: Department for Education and Employment. www.dfes.gov.
uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RB85.doc
Kinash, S., L. Crane, M.-M. Judd, and C. Knight. 2016. “Discrepant Stakeholder Perspectives on
Graduate Employability Strategies.” Higher Education Research and Development 35 (5):
951–967.
Lo Presti, A., S. Pluviano, and J. P. Briscoe. 2018. “Are Freelancers a Breed Apart? the Role of
Protean and Boundaryless Career Attitudes in Employability and Career Success.” Human
Resource Management Journal 28 (3): 427–442.
Mallon, M., and S. Walton. 2005. “Career and Learning: The Ins and the Outs of It.” Personnel
Review 34 (4): 468–487.
Martini, M., and D. Cavenago. 2017. “The Role of Perceived Workplace Development
Opportunities in Enhancing Individual Employability.” International Journal of Training and
Development 21 (1): 18–34.
Matthews, N., P. Delfabbro, and A. Winefield. 2015. “Casual Catastrophe or Contentment: Is
Casual Employment Related to Ill-Health in Young South Australians?” Labour & Industry:
A Journal of the Social and Economic Relations of Work 25 (2): 1–16.
44 K. MOORE AND M. H. KHAN

McArdle, S., L. Waters, J. P. Briscoe, and D. T. Hall. 2007. “Employability during Unemployment:
Adaptability, Career Identity and Human and Social Capital.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 71
(2): 247–264.
McArthur, E., K. Kubacki, B. Pang, and C. Alcaraz. 2017. “The Employers’ View of ‘work-ready’
Graduates: A Study of Advertisements for Marketing Jobs in Australia.” Journal of Marketing
Education 39 (2): 82–93.
McKee-Ryan, F. M., Z. Song, C. R. Wanberg, and A. J. Kinicki. 2005. “Psychological and Physical
Well-Being during Unemployment: A Meta-Analytic Study.” Journal of Applied Psychology 90
(1): 53–76.
McLean, G. N., and L. McLean. 2001. “If We Can’t Define HRD in One Country, How Can We Define
It in an International Context?” Human Resource Development International 4 (3): 313–326.
McMurray, S., M. Dutton, R. McQuaid, and A. Richard. 2016. “Employer Demands from Business
Graduates.” Education + Training 58 (1): 112–132.
McQuaid, R. W., and C. Lindsay. 2005. “The Concept of Employability.” Urban Studies 42 (2): 197–219.
Moore, Katherine. 2019. “The Quest for Sustainable Employment: Challenges Faced by Young People
During the Job Search Process.” Australian Journal of Social Issues 54 (1): 91–108.
Nazar, G., and B. van der Heijden. 2012. “Career Identity and Its Impact upon Self-Perceived
Employability among Chilean Male Middle-Aged Managers.” Human Resource Development
International 15 (2): 141–156.
Nelissen, J., A. Forrier, and M. Verbruggen. 2017. “Employee Development and Voluntary
Turnover: Testing the Employability Paradox.” Human Resource Management Journal 27 (1):
152–168.
Nilsson, S., and P.-E. Ellstrom. 2012. “Employability and Talent Management: Challenges for HRD
Practices.” European Journal of Training and Development 36 (1): 26–45.
OECD. 2018. “Youth Unemployment Rate.” https://data.oecd.org/unemp/youth-unemployment-
rate.htm
Olson, D. A., and K. S. Shultz. 2013. “Employability and Career Success: The Need for
Comprehensive Definitions of Career Success.” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 6
(1): 17–20.
Poba-Nzaou, P., S. Uwizeyemungu, and C. Clarke. 2018. “Patterns Underlying Required HR and
IT Competencies: A Content and Cluster Analysis of Advertisements of HR Manager
Positions.” The International Journal of Human Resource Management. doi:10.1080/
09585192.2018.1424019.
Rodrigues, R., C. Butler, and D. Guest. 2019. “Antecedents of Protean and Boundaryless Career
Orientations: The Role of Core Self-Evaluations, Perceived Employability and Social Capital.”
Journal of Vocational Behavior 110: 1–11.
Rothwell, A., and J. Arnold. 2007. “Self-Perceived Employability: Development and Validation of a
Scale.” Personnel Review 36 (1): 23–41.
Rynes, S. L., R. D. Bretz, and B. Gerhart. 1991. “The Importance of Recruitment in Job Choice:
A Different Way of Looking.” Personnel Psychology 44 (3): 487–521.
Sanders, J., and D. G. Andries. 2004. “Training, Task Flexibility and the Employability of
Low-Skilled Workers.” International Journal of Manpower 25 (1): 73–89.
Seibert, S. E., M. L. Kraimer, and R. C. Liden. 2001. “A Social Capital Theory of Career Success.”
The Academy of Management Journal 44 (2): 219–237.
Smith, E., and P. Comyn. 2004. “The Role of Employers in the Development of Employability Skills
in Novice Workers.” Research in Post-Compulsory Education 9 (3): 319–336.
Solberg, E., and A. Dysvik. 2015. “Employees’ Perceptions of HR Investment and Their Efforts to
Remain Internally Employable: Testing the Exchange-Based Mechanisms of the ‘new Psychological
Contract.’.” The International Journal of Human Resource Management 27 (9): 1–19.
Spence, M. 1973. “Job Market Signaling.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 87 (3): 355–374.
Taylor, A. 2005. “What Employers Look For: The Skills Debate and the Fit with Youth
Perceptions.” Journal of Education and Work 18 (2): 201–218.
Tomlinson, M. 2007. “Graduate Employability and Student Attitudes and Orientations to the
Labour Market.” Journal of Education and Work 20 (4): 285–304.
 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL 45

Van Buren III, H. J. 2003. “Boundaryless Careers and Employability Obligations.” Business Ethics
Quarterly 13 (2): 131–263.
Van der Heijden, B., and A. De Vos. 2015. “Sustainable Career.” Introductory Chapter In
Handbook of Research on Sustainable Careers, edited by A. De Vos, B. Van der Heijden, 1–19.
Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., A. H. de Lange, E. Demerouti, and C. M. Van der Heijden. 2009. “Age
Effects on the Employability—Career Success Relationship.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 74
(2): 156–164.
van Harten, J., E. Knies, and P. Leisink. 2016. “Employer’s Investments in Hospital Workers’
Employability and Employment Opportunities.” Personnel Review 45 (1): 84–102.
Vanhercke, D., N. De Cuyper, E. Peeters, and H. De Witte. 2014. “Defining Perceived
Employability: A Psychological Approach.” Personnel Review 43 (4): 592–605.
Varekamp, I., T. Knijn, M. van Der Gaag, and P. Bos. 2015. “Social Capital and Job Search
Behaviour of Long-Term Welfare Recipients.” International Journal of Sociology and Social
Policy 35 (11/12): 738–755.
Veld, M., J. Semeijn, and T. van Vuuren. 2015. “Enhancing Perceived Employability.” Personnel
Review 44 (6): 866–882.
Veth, K., B. Emans, B. Van Der Heijden, H. Korzilius, and A. De Lange. 2015. “Development (f)or
Maintenance? an Empirical Study on the Use of and Need for HR Practices to Retain Older
Workers in Health Care Organizations.” Human Resource Development Quarterly 26 (1): 53–80.
Worth, S. 2003. “Adaptability and Self-Management: A New Ethic of Employability for the Young
Unemployed?” Journal of Social Policy 32 (4): 607–621.
Worth, S. 2005. “Beating the ‘churning’ Trap in the Youth Labour Market.” Work, Employment &
Society 19 (2): 403–414.
Ybema, J. F., T. Van Vuuren, and V. D. Karen. 2017. “HR Practices for Enhancing Sustainable
Employability: Implementation, Use, and Outcomes.” The International Journal of Human
Resource Management 1–22. doi:10.1080/09585192.2017.1387865.