Extracción de ARN total de biopsias de piel

Consistent with past researches (Judge et al., 1995; Orpen, 1994) career success was conceptualized as “the positive psychological or work related outcomes or achievements one has accumulated as a result of one’s work experiences”. It encompasses subjective and objective aspects of achievement of an individual through an organisation or occupation (Judge et al., 1995; Lau & Shaffer, 1999; Nabi, 1999; Melamed, 1996). These studies have found that the variables that lead to objective career success often are quite different from those that lead to subjectively defined success. Objective career success has been said to be evaluated in terms of others’ perceptions rather than one’s own. On the other hand, subjective career success is denoted by an individual’s self-feelings regarding their career

success. Thus the concept of career success is comprised of two variables: objective career success and subjective career success. These two variables have been shown separately for careers before and after migration in the model.

Objective career success before and after migration

In line with previous researchers objective career success was measured in terms of salary, and employment status. It was necessary to identify respondents’ job before migration and the job at the time of the survey. And as the salary is a sensitive issue in terms of culture (Sri Lankans do not like to openly reveal their earnings), it was necessary to ask questions about salary in a different way. Respondents were asked to state their job before migration, employment status at present (at the time of the survey) and their present salary in one of the range given in the questionnaire before migration (Rs.48, 000 or less, 48,001-72,000, 72,001-96,000, 96,001-120,000, 120,000 and over) and at the time of the survey ($15,000 or less, 15,001-25,000, 25,001-35,000, 35,001-45,000, 45,001 and over).

Since the salary figures are difficult to compare considering the effect of inflation and other factors in relation to the time differences between the time of earning such salaries and the time of reporting for this study, employment status instead of objective career success before migration was considered in the model. The actual occupation of each individual was coded using the classification based on education and training developed by Wash (1995/96). It was selected as the most suitable measure of coding occupations from those investigated (ISCO 88; Elley-Irving and Irving-Elley index of 1970s; Scoville, 1965) for this study.

Wash (1995/96) developed a system to classify occupations by education and training based on three principles:

1. An occupation would be placed in the category that reflects the manner in which most workers become proficient in that occupation

2. Postsecondary institutional education requirements leading to degrees and certificates would be used to classify occupations in which completion of that

program is the most common way of entering the occupation, even though additional on-the-job experience is usually needed to become proficient in the occupation.

3. The length of time it generally takes an average worker to achieve proficiency through a combination of on-the-job training and experience would be used to classify occupations in which postsecondary training is generally not needed for entry.

Wash’s analysis resulted in 11 categories of education, training and experience with clear distinctions between them and so all occupations can be placed in one of the categories. Categories were ordered but not ranked. For the purpose of this study, those categories were ranked from 1 to 11 with 1 having the least education, training and experience with lowest level. Occupation requires an associate degree as classified by Wash (1995/96) represents a qualification that is not in existence either in New Zealand or in Sri Lanka. However, the occupations classified in Wash’s study under this category were ranked in that order.

The coding process was executed with three independent coders. The first coder was the researcher herself. The second coder was the chief supervisor who has extensive research experience and the third coder was the core supervisor of this study who has a similar level of research experience as the second coder. All cases were identified, coded, and compared to get an agreement. In coding the occupations, a coding agreed by all three coders was selected in the first instance. When there was no initial agreement between the coders, issues were discussed and the coding was selected either after all the coders reached agreement or where two coders finally agreed.

Subjective career success before and after migration

Subjective career success measures were in agreement with D.T. Hall’s definition (1996) of career success: “ the feeling of pride and accomplishment that comes from achieving one’s most important goals in life, be they achievement, family happiness, inner peace, or something else”. Respondents were asked to indicate their feeling of success with respect to

five issues related to the feeling of success. The items were developed for the purpose of this study incorporating the major themes of success indicated by D.T. Hall (1996) in his definition. The items used to measure subjective success before migration were:

1. I felt my career contributed to a good status for me in the community 2. I felt my career contributed to a good and happy family life

3. I felt my career led me to achieve my goals in life 4. I felt I had good career prospects

5. I felt peace of mind through my career

Scores on each comprehensive five-item scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (to a great extent) were summed and averaged to reach a score on the variable. Similar questions were asked to measure subjective success after migration with items starting from ‘I feel my career contributes to a good status for me in the community’ to ‘I feel peace of mind through my career’.

The responses concerning success in Sri Lanka or any other country they previously inhabited may be affected by the experiences after migration. However the questionnaire was developed in a sequence that insisted on the time of the experience (before migration, immediately after the arrival, and after migration) in answering respective questions.

Job Satisfaction before migration

Job satisfaction has received various definitions from different theorists and researchers. The general view of definitions shows that it as an aspect of attitudes (Stanley, 2001; Oshagbemi, 1999a; Geyer & Daly, 1998; Elkin & Inkson, 2000) and in this case a number of dispositional and situational factors have been identified as determinants of job satisfaction (Robie, Ryan, Schmieder, Parra & Smith, 1998). An individual’s attitude towards his/her job could either be positive or negative. Thus this study, consistent with Elkin and Inkson (2000) defines job satisfaction as “the degree to which an individual’s attitude to his or her job is positive”. An individual may have performed one or many jobs in his/her career and the study concentrated only on the last job they had before migration.

Through a review of various measures (Oshagbemi, 1999a & 2000) and arguments on different measures (Oshagbemi, 1999a), a four-item scale was selected to measure the satisfaction on their job.

The items were:

1) Which of the following indicates how much of the time you felt satisfied with your last job performed before migration? The possible options they had in this case range from 1 (never) to 5 (all of the time).

2) Which of the following statements best describes how you felt about your last job before migration? The options were from 1 (I hated it) to 5 (I loved it).

3) Which of the following statements best describes how you felt about changing your last job you performed before migration? The options were from 1 (I wanted to quit the job at once if I could) to 5 (I did not want to exchange my job for any other).

4) Which of the following statements best describes how you thought you compared with other people? The options were from 1 (no one disliked his/her job more than I disliked mine) to 5 (no one liked his/her job better than I liked mine).

The respondents were asked to indicate the level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction in terms of their last job they performed before migration. The average score of these items was then used in the analysis as the variable score.

Career Satisfaction after migration

Career satisfaction after migration was defined as the level of satisfaction the individual migrant reached in New Zealand either as an employed person or an unemployed person. Employed migrants were asked to report on their satisfaction with their job at the time of the survey while unemployed migrants were asked to report on their level of satisfaction as an unemployed person.

The same types of questions, as used in measuring job satisfaction before migration with a four-item scale, were used to measure the satisfaction after migration (see questions 4-1k to 4-1n and 4-2d to 4-2g in appendix 1). The item scores were summed and averaged to reach a final score on career satisfaction after migration.

Dependent Variable (DV)

The dependent variable in the model was overall career satisfaction. This was conceptualised based on the fact that a migrant’s career has two different situations; the before migration career and the after migration career and the overall outcome is comprised of both. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of migrants’ careers is the overall career satisfaction migrant individuals perceive from their career.

Overall Career Satisfaction

Some researchers have considered career satisfaction and career success as being similar to each other (Igbaria & Baroudi, 1993; Aryee & Chay, 1994; Keng-Howe & Liao, 1999) and therefore the measures used in career satisfaction researches are similar to the career success measures. This study, consistent with Judge et al. (1995) and Greenhaus, Parasuraman and Wormley (1990 as cited in Judge et al. 1995) conceptualised career satisfaction as “the satisfaction individuals derive from intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of their careers, including pay, advancement and developmental opportunities”. The variable here is the degree of satisfaction the individual expresses.

The degree of career satisfaction was measured with a five-item scale from 1) very dissatisfied to 5) very satisfied utilised in earlier studies (Judge et al., 1995; Aryee & Chay, 1994). The items were:

1. I am satisfied with the success I have achieved in my career

2. I am satisfied with the progress I have made towards meeting my overall career goals

3. I am satisfied with the progress I have made for advancement

4. I am satisfied with the progress I have made toward meeting my goals for the development of new skills.