In the frameworks of Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory and concepts of competence beliefs, we investigated trajectories of and dynamics between demands and competence beliefs relevant to applied work fields. The study had a longitudinal panel design with eight measurement waves (overall study span of 4 years). Participants (38.1% female) were early career scientists from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields who either worked at a university (academia group, n = 1,205) or in industry after having previously worked in academia (industry group, n = 436). We conducted bivariate dual change score modeling and found demands to increase in both groups and competence beliefs to increase in the industry group. While demands accelerated change in competence beliefs in the academia group, competence beliefs accelerated change in demands in the industry group. Implications for JD-R theory and concepts of ability-related self-views as well as practice are discussed.

This study reports on the development and validation of a new construct of application orientation (AO), which we defined as a vocational orientation concerning the interest for certain principles, values, and activities that are common for university graduates working in applied (i.e., industrial) fields. Using a multi-study program with different samples, the new construct was conceptualized (Study 1) and validated (Studies 2–4). In a qualitative content analysis with N = 102 professionals (all of them having an academic degree mostly in the STEM disciplines), four central facets of applied (i.e., industrial) work were identified (process orientation, customer focus, product focus, and economic focus). In a study with N = 200 university students and professionals with mixed disciplinary backgrounds (i.e., STEM but also non-STEM fields), the AO facets correlated with the RIASEC dimensions (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional; Holland, 1997) mostly as expected, and the AO facet product focus was predictive of the preference for applied work settings, supporting convergent validity assumptions. Discriminant validity of the AO facets was largely supported, examining average variance extracted by the AO factors compared to the RIASEC factors. In a known-groups validation study, AO was higher in N = 108 professionals from industry compared with N = 40 scientists (all from STEM fields) working at a university. In a sample of N = 128 early career scientists from the STEM fields, the AO facet product focus predicted applied work behavior in an assessment center.

No abstract