Crafting a Bright Future: Exploring How and When Public Service Motivation Leads to Civil Servants’ Subjective Career Success

Abstract

Although extensive research has examined the relationship between public service motivation and job-related outcomes among civil servants, limited attention has been paid to its career-related consequences. Drawing on the model of proactive motivation, this study investigates how and when public service motivation fosters civil servants’ subjective career success. Through a two-wave questionnaire survey of 270 civil servants from China, the findings reveal that public service motivation has a positive effect on civil servants’ subjective career success via the mediating role of career crafting. Moreover, visionary leadership and future work self-salience can strengthen this mediated relationship. Theoretical and practical implications are also discussed.

Keywords

public service motivation subjective career success career crafting future work self-salience visionary leadership

Introduction

Long-term career success has increasingly attracted attention in public sector human resource management, as it sustains civil servants’ motivation and enhances public service performance (Ahmad & Saad, 2020; Chen et al., 2022; X. Lu & Guy, 2018). Career success comprises objective and subjective dimensions: objective career success refers to observable achievements such as salary and rank, whereas subjective career success reflects evaluations of career fulfillment, including growth, goal attainment, and self-identity (Arthur et al., 2005; Colakoglu, 2011; Ng et al., 2005). In the public sector, rigid pay systems, limited promotion opportunities, and tenure-based advancement constrain the attainability of objective success and motivational value (X. Lu & Guy, 2018; Ma et al., 2015). Consequently, subjective career success becomes a more relevant and attainable indicator of career fulfillment and a key mechanism for sustaining motivation and long-term engagement (Chen et al., 2022). It is important to clarify that subjective career success is conceptually distinct from general job satisfaction, which reflects employees’ emotional response to their current job or work environment (Judge et al., 2017). In contrast, subjective career success refers to a broader evaluation of one’s entire career trajectory, including personal growth, goal achievement, and self-identity fulfillment (Arthur et al., 2005; Spurk et al., 2019). In the public sector, where objective career advancement is constrained, individuals’ perception of career success extends beyond job conditions to a sense of mission, social contribution, and long-term professional value (Chen et al., 2022; Van der Heijden & Vermeeren, 2025). Thus, enhancing subjective career success has become an increasing focus in public administration research and practice (Ahmad & Saad, 2020; Chen et al., 2022; Van der Heijden & Vermeeren, 2025).

Previous research on subjective career success among public employees has mostly concentrated on organization-level contextual antecedents (e.g., training and mentoring from supervisors) and individual-level antecedents, including demographic characteristics and personal ability such as political skills (Chen et al., 2022; Mohd Rasdi et al., 2011; Muhammad et al., 2022). While these studies provide valuable insights, they largely overlook the intrinsic motivational processes that shape how civil servants evaluate their long-term career development. This gap is critical because career development pathways and definitions of success here differ greatly from those in the private sector (Piatak, 2015). In the public sector, constrained opportunities for objective advancement (e.g., salary and promotion) make subjective evaluations of career success more central, often grounded in social recognition, policy impact, and public value creation (Abele et al., 2011; Piatak, 2015). Therefore, focusing solely on demographic, personal ability, or organizational factors may not be sufficient to fully explain the formation of subjective career success, but a deeper understanding of the psychological and motivational drivers embedded in the public service context is especially needed (Q. Wang et al., 2024). In this vein, public service motivation (PSM), defined as an individual’s intrinsic orientation toward serving the public interest (Perry & Wise, 1990; Vandenabeele, 2007), offers a promising explanatory perspective. As a core motivational force driving civil servants to pursue socially meaningful goals, PSM may play a significant role in shaping subjective career success (Bright, 2008; Ritz et al., 2016). However, existing studies mainly focus on its short-term, work-related outcomes, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment (S. Kim, 2012; Liu & Perry, 2016), leaving its long-term career implications underexplored. To address this critical gap and advance career theories and sustainable talent management strategies in public organizations, this study aims to investigate how PSM influences civil servants’ subjective career success, as well as the underlying mechanisms and boundary conditions that may strengthen this relationship.

The model of proactive motivation provides a theoretical framework for this research question. This framework underscores the pivotal role of an individual’s internal drive to proactively initiate and sustain behaviors in shaping future career development (Parker et al., 2010). By focusing on personal agency and proactivity, the theory posits that individuals’ characteristics can stimulate specific motivational states (i.e., “can do,” “reason to,” and “energized to”), which in turn foster proactive goal-oriented behaviors that ultimately lead to future outcomes (Parker et al., 2010). This study argues that career crafting is such a behavior that shapes long-term, career-related outcomes and plays a mediating role linking PSM and subjective career success. Career crafting is individuals’ active professional behaviors (De Vos et al., 2019; Tims & Akkermans, 2020), which is conducive to professional self-management in public organizations and promote career growth (Leeuwen et al., 2021; Ni et al., 2024). As a highly altruistic and socially oriented motivation (Vandenabeele, 2007), PSM aligns with the “goal motivation” of the model of proactive motivation. Individuals with high PSM tend to have clear career goals that drive active career construction and career reflection (Hu et al., 2025; Piatak, 2016). Career crafting encompasses both (a) proactive reflection on career goals, which improves professional clarity (De Vos et al., 2019; Vidwans, 2016), and (b) proactive construction of career goals to achieve them, which enhances career competence (Tims & Akkermans, 2020). This active adaptability helps individuals successfully manage their career development, thus improving subjective career success (Zacher, 2014).

Furthermore, it is important to note that the above process is conditional. The model of proactive motivation emphasizes that proactive behaviors are jointly shaped by personal characteristics and contextual factors (Parker et al., 2010). Career crafting is inherently future-oriented, encompassing both adaptation to current roles and long-term career planning (De Vos et al., 2019; Tims & Akkermans, 2020). From an organizational perspective, structural constraints such as limited promotion pathways lead to ambiguous career goals and a diminished sense of personal achievement (Campbell, 2025; Jung, 2014; Napitupulu et al., 2017). Factors that strengthen future orientation and career meaning are particularly relevant in this process. This study focuses on two such factors: future work self-salience (FWSS) and visionary leadership. As an individual difference factor, FWSS refers to the clarity of one’s future work self and has been shown to strengthen career goal orientation and organizational identification (Strauss et al., 2012; Xu & Yu, 2025; H. Yu et al., 2018). Civil servants with high FWSS are more likely to perceive their work as meaningful and to engage in proactive career behaviors, such as career crafting, to align their actions with future career goals (Guo et al., 2022; Strauss et al., 2012; Talluri et al., 2025). From an organizational perspective, visionary leadership, as a future-oriented leadership style that enhances individual career satisfaction by articulating a clear organizational vision, is widely acknowledged for promoting individuals’ long-term career development (J. Kim et al., 2023; Van Knippenberg & Stam, 2014). Visionary leaders can help employees clarify organizational direction and strengthen employees’ career aspirations, thereby encouraging proactive career behaviors such as career crafting (Griffin et al., 2010; Song et al., 2025). Therefore, both FWSS and visionary leadership, as future-oriented factors closely tied to career development, are expected to act as boundary conditions affecting the indirect effect of PSM on subjective career success.

To sum up, based on the model of proactive motivation, this study examines how PSM affects civil servants’ subjective career success through career crafting, and how this process is moderated by FWSS and visionary leadership (see Figure 1). It offers three theoretical contributions. First, it extends PSM’s career-related outcomes by identifying career crafting as the mediating mechanism, highlighting how PSM shapes long-term career development beyond short-term career implications. Second, it integrates career crafting into public administration theory, demonstrating its relevance in contexts where career autonomy is usually constrained. Finally, it enriches research on the model of proactive motivation by incorporating FWSS and visionary leadership as boundary conditions, thereby enhancing its explanatory power for career development in public organizations.

Figure 1.

The Theoretical Model.

Theories and Hypotheses

The Model of Proactive Motivation

The model of proactive motivation was proposed by Parker et al. (2010) to explain the process by which an individual proactively strives to change their work environment and/or themselves to achieve a different future. First, the model of proactive motivation suggests that being proactive is “being proactive is about taking control to make things happen rather than watching things happen” (Parker et al., 2010, p. 828). Thus, the model of proactive motivation identifies proactivity as a goal-driven process that involves setting a positive goal (proactive goal generation) and striving to achieve that positive goal (proactive goal striving; Ng et al., 2021). Second, the model of proactive motivation suggests that individuals, having identified a set of prospective goals that they can personally pursue, will be in a position of motivational states of “can do,” having “reason to” do, and being “energized to” do (Parker et al., 2010). Third, the model of proactive motivation suggests that an individual’s proactive motivational state will be influenced by both individual and contextual factors, which will jointly affect the proactive process and outcome (Zhang & Inness, 2019). Fourth, the model of proactive motivation explains an individual’s potential career outcomes. Therefore, this framework focuses on a conscious, self-initiated, goal-driven process, highlighting the role of individual agency and proactivity in active self-regulation (Parker et al., 2010). It can be used to explain positive behaviors or positive outcomes of individuals in various kinds of organizations, such as constructive voice behavior (Ng et al., 2021), higher job performance (W. C. Lu & Kuo, 2016), well-being (Afzal et al., 2024), and so on.

Recently, some scholars have extended the model of proactive motivation to career management research, pointing out that individual cognitive factors (e.g., career self-efficacy beliefs, Valero et al., 2015; future work self, Guan et al., 2014), affective factors (e.g., expected positive emotions at work, Hirschi et al., 2013), and motivational state factors (e.g., career stress and career exploration, Strauss et al., 2017) have a critical impact on career development. Individual proactivity can motivate individuals to proactively engage in career self-management behaviors (e.g., career exploration, Hirschi et al., 2013), which in turn produce positive outcomes (e.g., improved job performance and reduced propensity to leave, Guan et al., 2014). However, current research based on the model of proactive motivation exploring individual proactivity for individual career outcomes remains under-researched. Subjective career success refers to “an individual’s perceptual appraisal and emotional response to their career” (Ng & Feldman, 2014, p. 170). As individuals need to take more responsibility for career development (Spurk et al., 2019), more and more individuals take subjective career success as the goal of self-career pursuit (Enache et al., 2011). Therefore, it is of theoretical and practical interest to explore how and when individual proactivity influences subjective career success using the model of proactive motivation (Ng & Feldman, 2014).

Career crafting is defined as “the proactive behavior of individuals to optimize career outcomes by improving the personal-career fit” (De Vos et al., 2019, p. 128). Compared to other proactive behaviors, such as job crafting, career crafting represents their active reflection on and construction of career development, whereas job crafting tends to focus on an individual’s proactive changes to their current work (Ge et al., 2023; Tims & Akkermans, 2020). Thus, career crafting focuses on long-term outcomes, encompasses a broader range of role behaviors, and can be examined within more extensive research contexts (Lee et al., 2021). In this study, we concentrate specifically on the proactive career behaviors individuals undertake during their career development process (Tims & Akkermans, 2020). Therefore, this study proposes that career crafting is the key mediator linking civil servants’ PSM and their subjective career success.

The Mediating Effect of Career Crafting

According to the model of proactive motivation, individuals are influenced by both individual differences and contextual factors, leading them to exhibit proactive job or career behaviors and pursue positive work or career outcomes (Parker et al., 2010). PSM, as a motivating force for employees in public organizations to advance public missions and interests both within and outside these organizations (Tuan, 2016), is defined as “the belief, values and attitudes that go beyond self-interest and organizational interest, that concern the interest of a larger political entity and that motivate individuals to act accordingly whenever appropriate” (Vandenabeele, 2007, p. 549). This study posits that PSM can foster individuals’ unique career inclinations and sense of career mission, compelling them to engage in proactive career crafting behaviors.

On the one hand, PSM motivates individuals toward active construction of their careers due to its relatively stable nature as an individual characteristic (Perry et al., 2008). Those with high levels of PSM tend to have a “predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions and organizations” (Perry & Wise, 1990, p. 368). This makes them have a career preference for non-profit careers (Bright, 2016), they tend to choose public sector jobs, and they have a stronger professional identity for non-profit organizations and careers (Q. Wang et al., 2024). Therefore, civil servants with high PSM have clearer and more value-consistent career goals. In order to achieve career goals, they will take the initiative to adopt a series of proactive behaviors, for example, crafting their work resources and challenges (Bakker, 2015), crafting their job (Tuan, 2018), etc. At the same time, employees in public organizations with higher PSM tend to devote more to public service in the process of career development and strive to achieve higher performance (De Simone et al., 2016; Q. Wang et al., 2024), to accumulate more career resources to achieve their career goals.

On the other hand, PSM will trigger the individual to actively reflect on their career. For civil servants with high PSM, the desire to change society by helping those in need—they empathize with the vulnerable, and they are prepared to make sacrifices for the good of society (Perry, 1996). Serving the common good is not only a source of meaning for their work but also a source of meaning for their lives (Luu, 2021). Civil servants with higher PSM tend to have a stronger sense of mission during their career development—they hope to do good for others and devote themselves to the public interest (S. Kim et al., 2013). This allows them to position themselves as givers in their career development and to identify public value as one of the “most important motives, values, and guiding principles in life” (Grant et al., 2008, p. 900). Such career orientation and respect for public values will make individuals pay more attention to the pursuit of continuous satisfaction of higher-order needs in career development, such as helping others, benefiting society, and self-realization (Tuan, 2018). Therefore, they will constantly think about their career value at work, which helps them gain a sense of meaning and mission in career development (Tims & Akkermans, 2020) and promote their career success.

To sum up, this study believes that PSM will push employees to place the interests of public organizations and citizens above their own interests in their career development (Jaskyte, 2017) as one of the most important motivations, values, and guiding principles (Grant et al., 2008). This will drive them to constantly take the initiative to construct their career, and reflect on the significance and value of their occupational development, that is, to take the initiative of career crafting behavior. Therefore, based on the above analysis, this study makes the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: PSM has a positive relationship with career crafting.

According to the model of proactive motivation, employees who engage in active behavior will experience proactive goal generation (e.g., planning self and situational change) and proactive goal striving (e.g., insisting on overcoming obstacles and self-regulation), and the degree of participation in the two processes affects their different career futures (Parker et al., 2010). Subjective career success encompasses internal factors such as personal values and self-accomplishment (Wei et al., 2024). Existing literature has identified multiple predictors of subjective career success, including human capital, organizational sponsorship, sociodemographic factors, and stable individual differences (Ng et al., 2005). As a proactive career behavior that an individual actively conducts to cultivate their career life (De Vos et al., 2019), career crafting can more effectively emphasize an individual’s agentic and subjective role throughout their career (Tims & Akkermans, 2020). Career crafting includes career goals and the behavior of achieving career goals; it is possible to further affect an individual’s career and stimulate his or her subjective career success (Jiang et al., 2023).

In detail, on the one hand, the proactive construction of the career by civil servants is conducive to the stimulation of their own subjective career success. It encompasses behaviors such as actively seeking development opportunities, engaging in continuous learning, and building professional networks, all of which strengthen individuals’ self-management capabilities and enhance essential career competencies in planning, communication, and reflection (Leeuwen et al., 2021; Tims & Akkermans, 2020). These proactive efforts allow civil servants to intentionally shape their career paths and align their work experiences with their personal goals and values. This alignment typically manifests as a congruence between PSM and the mission of public organizations, or as a fit between individual competencies, role expectations, and the requirements of a public sector position (Gould-Williams et al., 2015). Such congruence, in turn, serves as a key determinant of their subjective career success (Akkermans et al., 2013). Research has shown that these proactive tendencies not only increase perceived employability and recognition but also contribute to greater psychological well-being and career satisfaction (Eby et al., 2003; Spurk et al., 2019). By taking ownership of their professional growth, civil servants create a stronger sense of agency and meaningfulness in their work, which ultimately enhances their overall career fulfillment.

On the other hand, proactive reflection on one’s career also plays a vital role in shaping subjective career success. Reflection on personal values, aspirations, and motivations enhances civil servants’ career clarity, public service mission, and self-understanding (De Vos et al., 2019; Vidwans, 2016). This process not only enhances civil servants’ career clarity and self-awareness but also guides them to evaluate their professional development based on intrinsic criteria such as PSM and commitment to public values (Holt, 2018), rather than external factors like job titles or salary metrics. This reflective process encourages civil servants to recognize meaningful goals, identify developmental needs, and maintain a coherent sense of direction in their career development (Akkermans & Tims, 2017; Akkermans et al., 2013). Through continuous self-reflection, they become more aware of their strengths and limitations, which promotes a more authentic alignment between personal identity and professional roles (Hall & Chandler, 2005). Such alignment not only reinforces psychological well-being and work engagement but also enhances the perception of success derived from personal growth and contribution (Ng & Feldman, 2014; Spurk et al., 2019). Hence, reflection serves as a self-regulatory mechanism through which civil servants cultivate meaning, purpose, and sustained satisfaction in their public sector careers.

Furthermore, career crafting serves as a bridge between the PSM and subjective career success. In one way, civil servants with high PSM are motivated to have a strong preference and professional identity (Q. Wang et al., 2024) and to alter their work resources and requirements to deliver higher-quality public services (Bakker, 2015; Tuan, 2018). This type of active career construction enhances civil servants’ career abilities and promotes their subjective career success (Akkermans et al., 2013). In another way, employees with high PSM are dedicated to serving the public interest and working toward it (Francois, 2000). They are encouraged by this value orientation to continually consider their professional values, which leads to greater career clarity and an enhanced feeling of significance and career progress (Tims & Akkermans, 2020; Vidwans, 2016). These improvements are favorable to subjective career success. Therefore, based on the above analysis, this study makes the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: PSM has an indirect positive relationship with subjective career success, via the mediating role of career crafting.

The Moderating Role of FWSS

The model of proactive motivation emphasizes that different individual characteristics lead to variations in how motivational states are activated and how proactive behaviors are generated across individuals (Parker et al., 2006, 2010). Research suggests that an individual’s beliefs about future work and career development often serve as a critical boundary condition that stimulates proactive behaviors. FWSS, which refers to “the ease of construction and clarity of an individual’s hoped-for work-based identity” (K. Yu et al., 2016, p. 28), is commonly regarded in the literature as the cognitive representation of one’s future self in relation to their career (Strauss et al., 2012). It reflects a stronger sense of control over one’s career development (Lin et al., 2016; Voigt & Strauss, 2024) and can foster ambitious career aspirations (O’Brien, 1996), thereby playing a significant role in facilitating proactive career behaviors. Therefore, given that the salience of possible identities may exert different effects across contexts (Ashforth, 2001), this study proposes that FWSS is likely to strengthen the positive relationship between PSM and subjective career success.

On the one hand, FWSS provides a vivid, goal-oriented vision for an individual’s future career (Guo et al., 2022). For people with high PSM, this clarity helps direct their altruistic motivation to specific professional shaping behaviors (e.g., identifying their role in public service and actively advocating for public policy change). On the other hand, individuals with high FWSS generally have a relatively high sense of control over their future career prospects. They believe that their future is controllable and achievable (Voigt & Strauss, 2024). This will enable them to engage in more positive motivational states and engage in career crafting behaviors, resulting in more positive career outcomes. In contrast, individuals with low FWSS will find it difficult to identify what their career ideals are, which makes it difficult for them to find the gap between their current career development status and career development goals (Zeng et al., 2025), so that they cannot strive for clear career goals. In addition, a low level of FWSS means that individuals have difficulty in enhancing their sense of control when facing possible setbacks and challenges on the career development path; it is difficult to adapt to the uncertainty on the career path (K. Yu et al., 2016), which is not conducive to the generation of proactive career behaviors. Therefore, based on the above analysis, this study makes the following assumptions:

Hypothesis 3a: FWSS moderates the positive relationship between PSM and career crafting. Specifically, this relationship will be stronger when the level of FWSS is high.

Hypothesis 3b: FWSS moderates the indirect positive relationship among PSM, career crafting, and subjective career success. Specifically, this mediated relationship will be stronger when the level of FWSS is high.

The Moderating Role of Visionary Leadership

The model of proactive motivation further posits that contextual factors may also influence the process through which proactive motivational states and behaviors are driven (Parker et al., 2006, 2010). Among various contextual factors, the role of leadership has garnered significant attention from emerging career scholars (Chughtai, 2018; Litano & Major, 2016). There is a growing discussion on how leadership styles serve as important conditional factors affecting individual career development, as leaders are generally recognized to directly help employees generate career goals, provide career planning, and implement career development training and counseling (Ni et al., 2024). For civil servants, the structural constraints on career progression and the prevalent ambiguity in organizational mission significantly amplify uncertainties in career development (Cohen & Duberley, 2015; Dafou, 2018). Consequently, the guidance on career objectives, resources for career advancement, and sense of purpose conveyed by leaders becomes critically important. Visionary leadership, as a positive leadership style defined as “the communication of a future image of a collective with the intention to persuade others to contribute to its realization” (Van Knippenberg & Stam, 2014, p. 241), is widely recognized by public administration scholars for its positive influence on the development of individual civil servants and team dynamics. For example, visionary leadership has been shown to reduce civil servants’ cognitive uncertainty and foster team innovation in the public sector by enhancing team cohesion (Bernards, 2023; Van der Voet & Steijn, 2021). This means that visionary leadership may play a crucial boundary condition in the process of PSM promoting civil servants’ subjective career success.

Specifically, first, visionary leadership communicates clear organizational and personal objectives, thereby enhancing individuals’ intrinsic motivation for career exploration and their confidence in achieving career development goals (Stam et al., 2010). This increased clarity and motivation, in turn, promote proactive career crafting behaviors (Greco & Kraimer, 2020). Second, visionary leaders offer autonomous support and encouragement, as well as provide employees with appropriate developmental opportunities and guidance in realizing the organizational vision (Khan et al., 2024). Such support enhances employees’ identification with the organization and commitment to public service (T. Wang et al., 2025), enabling them to adapt more effectively during the career crafting process and achieve career development more efficiently. Finally, visionary leadership helps reduce employees’ perceived uncertainty about future career paths through clear communication and consistent action (Bernards, 2023; Utomo et al., 2022). This fosters a positive and optimistic outlook (Mascareño et al., 2020), enables individuals to clarify future goals, buffers the negative impact of unexpected challenges on proactive behavior, and facilitates the achievement of career aspirations. Therefore, based on the above analysis, this study makes the following assumptions:

Hypothesis 4a: Visionary leadership moderates the positive relationship between PSM and career crafting, specifically, this relationship will be stronger when the level of visionary leadership is high.

Hypothesis 4b: Visionary leadership moderates the indirect positive relationship among PSM, career crafting, and subjective career success. Specifically, this mediated relationship will be stronger when the level of visionary leadership is high.

Research Design

Sample and Procedure

The sample for this study comprised grassroots-level civil servants working in subdistrict offices and township governments in Beijing, China. This group was selected because their roles often require close interaction with citizens and frequent engagement in public affairs, making them a particularly suitable population for examining how PSM shapes career attitudes and behaviors. Additionally, despite the hierarchical organizational structure and merit-based promotion mechanisms within Chinese government agencies, these organizations consistently emphasize proactive organizational development and strategic planning. They actively enhance civil servants’ sense of career purpose and professional competence through cadre development systems. Consequently, the grassroots personnel in China’s public sector provide an important research context for exploring PSM and career outcomes.

Participants were recruited in collaboration with local administrative departments. Civil servants from multiple subdistrict and township units were randomly invited to participate, ensuring adequate variation across departments and job functions. Each participant was informed of the purpose of the survey and assured of confidentiality before participation, and their consent was obtained. Upon completion of both waves of the survey, a reward of 10 RMB yuan was provided to each participant. Initially, this study obtained 382 individual samples. Subsequently, all participants were included in group chats on WeChat, a well-known Chinese instant messaging social media platform, where online electronic questionnaires were administered to minimize missing values. Prior to the survey, researchers informed participants of the survey’s purpose and ensured their informed consent. In the first wave of data collection, this study gathered participants’ self-rated PSM, FWSS, their evaluations of immediate leaders’ visionary leadership, and their demographic information. One month later, the second wave collected participants’ self-assessed career crafting and subjective career success.

For sample collection, this study received 327 samples in the first round of the survey and 293 samples in the second round. Finally, this study collected a total of 270 valid samples with an effective collection rate of 82.57%. In the final sample, the average organizational tenure of the samples was 7.17 years, with a standard deviation of 4.22. In terms of gender, the sample consists of 100 males (37.04%) and 170 females (62.96%). In terms of age, the average age of the sample was 33.31 years, with a standard deviation of 6.08. In terms of education level, there were a total of 12 people with a vocational college school background, accounting for 4.44%; a total of 158 people with a bachelor’s degree, accounting for 58.52%; a total of 95 people with a master’s degree, accounting for 35.19%; and a total of 5 people with a doctoral degree, accounting for 1.85%.

Measures

The measures used in this study are all well-established English scales from papers published in top international management or psychology journals (all measurement items can be seen in the Table A1 in Appendix A). This study strictly followed Brislin’s (1970) back-translation approach to translate the scales into Chinese. All the measures in this study were based on a five-point Likert scale (“1” for “totally disagree” and “5” for “totally agree”).

Public Service Motivation

This study measured PSM using the 5-item Merit Systems Protection Board scale adapted from the 40-item PSM scale developed by Perry (1996), which has been widely used in previous public administration research (Miao et al., 2018; Wright et al., 2013). A sample item was “Meaningful public service is very important to me.” (Cronbach’s α = .82).

Career Crafting

Tims and Akkermans (2020)’s eight-item scale was used in this study to measure career crafting. A sample item was “I strengthen my career goals and make sure that they remain up to date.” (Cronbach’s α = .75).

Subjective Career Success

Greenhaus et al. (1990)’s five-item scale was used in this study to measure subjective career success. A sample item was “I am satisfied with the success I have achieved in my career.” (Cronbach’s α = .76).

Future Work Self-Salience

Strauss et al. (2012)’s three-item scale was used in this study to measure FWSS. A sample item was “My career future is very easy for me to imagine.” (Cronbach’s α = .78).

Visionary Leadership

Drawing on methodological precedents in prior public administration literature (Bernards, 2023), J. Kim et al. (2023)’s three-item scale was adopted in this study to measure each employee’s perception of their immediate supervisor’s visionary leadership. The decision to employ employee ratings rather than leader self-reports is primarily grounded in the recognition by public administration scholars that there is a significant discrepancy in accuracy between leader self-assessed leadership and subordinate-assessed leadership. The latter approach is not only more commonly associated with individual performance and other work outcomes but is also the prevailing method employed in leadership research within the public sector (Jacobsen & Bøgh Andersen, 2015). A sample item was “My immediate leader clearly articulates his/her vision of the future.” (Cronbach’s α = .73).

Control Variables

This study controlled for some demographic information (including gender, age, education, and organizational tenure) of participated civil servants.

Testing Multicollinearity

To examine potential multicollinearity issues in the research model, this study calculated tolerance and variance inflation factor (VIF) scores. As shown in Table 1, the results indicate that the tolerance values for all research variables are greater than 0.20, and the VIF scores are all below the threshold of 10 (Hair et al., 2009). Therefore, multicollinearity does not pose a major concern in the research model of this study.

Table 1.

Testing Multicollinearity.

Variables	Tolerance value	VIF score
Public service motivation	0.46	2.12
Career crafting	0.75	1.34
Future work self-salience	0.47	2.12
Visionary leadership	0.93	1.07

Note. N = 270. VIF = variance inflation factor.

Results

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

By using Mplus 8.0 software, this study performed a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs). As shown in Table 2, the five-factor model (including PSM, career crafting, subjective career success, FWSS, and visionary leadership) demonstrated superior model fit compared to alternative competing models (χ²/df = 1.58, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.05, and SRMR = 0.06). To further test the convergent validity and discriminant validity, this study calculated the average variance extracted (AVE) and construct reliability (CR) of each research variable. The AVE values for all variables exceed 0.50, and the CR values all surpass 0.70 (see Table 3). Besides, the square roots of the AVE for all variables exceed their correlation coefficients with all other variables. The evidence confirms that the theoretical model proposed in this study exhibits satisfactory convergent validity and discriminant validity.

Table 2.

Confirmatory Factor Analyses Results.

Model	χ²	df	χ²/df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR
Five-factor model (PSM, CC, SCS, FWSS, VL)	362.82	230	1.58	0.93	0.92	0.05	0.06
Four-factor model (PSM, CC, SCS, FWSS + VL)	707.13	246	2.87	0.76	0.73	0.08	0.08
Three-factor model (PSM, CC + SCS, FWSS + VL)	844.98	249	3.39	0.69	0.65	0.09	0.09
Two-factor model (PSM, CC + SCS + FWSS + VL)	886.09	251	3.53	0.67	0.64	0.10	0.09
Single-factor model (PSM + CC + SCS + FWSS + VL)	946.02	252	3.75	0.64	0.60	0.10	0.09

Note. N = 270; PSM = public service motivation; CC = career crafting; SCS = subjective career success; FWSS = future work self-salience; VL = visionary leadership.

Table 3.

Means, Standardized Deviations, and Correlations.

Variables	Mean	SD	CR	AVE	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. Gender	1.63	0.48
2. Age	33.31	6.08			−.00
3. Education	4.34	0.59			.15*	−.06
4. Organizational tenure	7.17	4.22			−.04	.72**	−.12
5. Public service motivation	4.25	0.61	0.85	0.54	−.01	.08	.27**	.03
6. Career crafting	4.27	0.42	0.82	0.50	−.08	−.01	.21**	.01	.47**
7. Subjective career success	4.02	0.65	0.81	0.51	−.09	.02	.07	.05	.51**	.42**
8. Future work self-salience	3.92	0.83	0.78	0.55	.13*	.08	.30**	.03	.69**	.40**	.33**
9. Visionary leadership	4.33	0.61	0.75	0.51	.11	.00	−.06	.04	.13**	.07	.07	.20**

Note: N = 270; Gender: 1 = male, 2 = female; education: 1 = junior high school or below; 2 = senior high school/Technical school, 3 = vocational college, 4 = bachelor’s degree, 5 = master’s degree, 6 = doctoral degree.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Testing Common Method Bias

Although this study employed a multiwave, time-lagged survey design, the potential for common method bias (CMB) remains, necessitating further assessment. First, following Podsakoff et al. (2003), Harman’s single-factor test was conducted. The analysis extracted six common factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, cumulatively explaining 60.48% of the variance. The first factor accounted for 27.24% of the variance, which is below the critical threshold of 50%, indicating no severe CMB issue. Second, using CFA results, this study compared different factor models to test CMB. The results showed that the fit of a single-factor model (loading all items onto one common factor, χ²/df = 3.75, CFI (Comparative Fit Index) = 0.64, TLI (Tucker–Lewis Index) = 0.60, RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) = 0.10, SRMR (Standardized Root Mean Square Residual) = 0.09) was significantly worse than that of the theoretical model (χ²/df = 1.58, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.05, and SRMR = 0.06) suggesting no significant CMB problem in the theoretical model. Third, following the approach recommended by Williams and Anderson (1994), this study controlled for the effects of an unmeasured latent method factor. Specifically, a CMB factor was added as an unmeasured latent variable with all items loaded on it, and models with and without this factor were compared. The results show that the change in CFI is 0.006, which is below the 0.01 threshold suggested by Cheung and Rensvold (2002). This further suggests the absence of a CMB problem in this study. Taken together, the evidence above indicates that CMB is not a serious issue in this study.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations

This study analyzed descriptive statistics of research variables and examined correlation coefficients using SPSS 26.0 software. As shown in Table 3, the relationships between key variables align with the theoretical hypotheses proposed in this study. For instance, PSM has significant positive relationships with career crafting (r = .47, p < .01) and subjective career success (r = .51, p < .01). Similarly, career crafting showed a significant positive association with subjective career success (r = .42, p < .01). These findings provide some evidence supporting the theoretical framework of this investigation.

Hypothesis Testing

This study tested the research hypotheses using SPSS 26.0 developed by IBM and Mplus 8.0 developed by Bengt Muthén and Linda K. Muthén software. First, regression analyses were conducted using SPSS 26.0. As shown in Models 2 and 5 of Table 4, PSM demonstrated a positive relationship with career crafting (B = 0.31, SE = 0.04, p < .01), while career crafting exhibited a positive association with subjective career success (B = 0.37, SE = 0.09, p < .01). Subsequently, this study employed the PROCESS macro to examine the indirect effect of PSM on subjective career success. Using bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples, the results revealed a significant mediation effect (indirect effect = 0.11, 95% CI [0.03, 0.22]), indicating that career crafting mediates the relationship between PSM and subjective career success. These findings support Hypotheses 1 and 2.

Table 4.

Regression Results.

Variables	Career crafting						Subjective career success
	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3		Model 4		Model 5
	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE
Control variables
Gender	−0.10	0.05	−0.08	0.05	−0.08	0.05	−0.14	0.08	−0.07	0.07
Age	0.00	0.01	–0.01	0.01	0.00	0.01	−0.00	0.01	−0.01	0.01
Education	0.16**	0.04	0.08*	0.04	0.04	0.04	0.10	0.07	−0.09	0.06
Organizational tenure	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.00	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01
Predictors
PSM			0.31**	0.04	−0.70**	0.21			0.46**	0.06
Mediator
Career crafting									0.37**	0.09
Moderators
FWSS					−0.46**	0.16
Visionary leadership					−0.62**	0.18
PSM × FWSS					0.13**	0.04
PSM × Visionary leadership					0.15**	0.04
R ²	.06		.24		.31		.02		.32
ΔR²			.18		.25				.30

Note. N = 270; PSM = public service motivation; FWSS = future work self-salience; VL = visionary leadership.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Following the confirmation of Hypothesis 2, this study further examined the moderating hypotheses. Model 3 in Table 4 shows that the interaction terms (PSM × FWSS and PSM × visionary leadership) were significantly positively associated with career crafting (B_{PSM × FWSS} = 0.13, SE = 0.04, p < 0.01; B_{PSM × visionary leadership} = 0.15, SE = 0.04, p < .01), suggesting preliminary support for the moderating effects. To clarify the nature of these interactions, this study calculated simple slopes at high (Mean + 1 SD) and low (Mean − 1 SD) levels of the moderators. As shown in Figure 2, the positive effect of PSM on career crafting was stronger when the level of FWSS was high (b = 0.54, SE = 0.11, p < .01) compared to lower FWSS conditions (b = 0.34, SE = 0.06, p < .01). Similarly, Figure 3 shows enhanced effects of PSM on career crafting under higher levels of visionary leadership (b = 0.40, SE = 0.05, p < .01) relative to lower levels (b = 0.22, SE = 0.05, p < .01). These results confirm Hypotheses 3a and 4a.

Figure 2.

The Moderating Effect of FWSS.

Figure 3.

The Moderating Effect of Visionary Leadership.

Finally, to test the integrated moderated mediation hypotheses (Hypotheses 3b and 4b), this study examined the conditional indirect effects at different levels of the moderators by using Mplus 8.0 software. As shown in Table 5, the indirect effect of PSM on subjective career success through career crafting was stronger when FWSS was high (indirect effect = 0.21, 95% CI [0.07, 0.40]) than when it was low (indirect effect = 0.13, 95%CI [0.04, 0.26]). The difference between these conditional indirect effects was statistically significant (difference = 0.08, 95%CI [0.02, 0.15]). Similarly, regarding the moderating role of visionary leadership, the indirect effect was stronger under high levels of visionary leadership (indirect effect = 0.20, 95%CI [0.07, 0.38]) compared to low levels (indirect effect = 0.13, 95%CI [0.03, 0.29]). This difference was also significant (difference = 0.07, 95%CI [0.005, 0.14]). These findings provide robust support for Hypotheses 3b and 4b, confirming that both FWSS and visionary leadership significantly strengthen the indirect effect of PSM on subjective career success via the mediating role of career crafting.

Table 5.

Testing Mediating Effects and Moderated Mediation Effects.

Moderator	Indirect effect	Estimate	BootLLCI	BootULCI
FWSS	Effect 1 (Mean − 1SD)	0.13	0.04	0.26
	Effect 2 (Mean + 1SD)	0.21	0.07	0.40
	Difference (Effect 2 − Effect 1)	0.08	0.02	0.15
Visionary leadership	Effect 1 (Mean − 1SD)	0.13	0.03	0.29
	Effect 2 (Mean + 1SD)	0.20	0.07	0.38
	Difference (Effect 2 − Effect 1)	0.07	0.005	0.14

Note. FWSS = future work self-salience.

Discussion and Conclusion

Based on the model of proactive motivation, this study constructed a moderated mediation model to examine how PSM among civil servants contributes to their subjective career success. Based on two-wave questionnaire data collected from civil servants in China, this study yielded several key findings. First, career crafting fully mediated PSM’s influence on subjective career success, and the direct effect was insignificant. The Chinese public sector’s unique cultural context can explain this indirect pathway (Sun & Gu, 2016). Employees with high PSM derive meaning from contributing to the public good, yet the bureaucratic structures may limit direct and autonomous value expression (Tao & Wen, 2022; Wright & Pandey, 2008). Therefore, civil servants with high PSM leverage career crafting to actively create conditions for the fulfillment of their prosocial values, thereby fostering stronger subjective career success.

Furthermore, this study identified two important boundary conditions. For high-FWSS civil servants, PSM’s positive indirect effect on subjective career success was significantly stronger, as a clear and compelling vision of one’s future career provides a concrete career goal and makes them strive for it (Guo et al., 2022; Strauss et al., 2012). Likewise, visionary leadership strengthened the relationship between PSM and career crafting. Visionary leaders provide coherent direction and purpose, aligning employees’ public service values with organizational goals, fostering a supportive environment for proactive career shaping in the public sector (Stam et al., 2010; Van Knippenberg & Stam, 2014).

Theoretical Implications

This study offers several theoretical contributions. To begin with, this study offers a critical theoretical extension to the PSM literature by reconceptualizing PSM from an antecedent of sector choice to a dynamic motivational resource for ongoing career management within the public sector. While established research firmly positions PSM as a predictor of entering and remaining in public service (Perry & Wise, 1990; Rose, 2013; Wright & Pandey, 2008), the findings reveal its sustained, proactive role after entry. This study demonstrates that PSM is not merely a stable trait but a driver of career crafting, such as role tailoring and relationship building, which subsequently enhances subjective career success. This mechanism has two key implications. First, the theoretical focus moves away from PSM’s impact on organizational outcomes (Awan et al., 2020; Bakker, 2015), individual work attitudes (Homberg et al., 2015; Liu & Perry, 2016), and work behaviors (Awan et al., 2020). Instead, this study emphasizes PSM’s role in shaping employee career trajectories and evaluations. This shift bridges public administration theory with contemporary career studies (Ng et al., 2005). Second, it clarifies the black box between prosocial motivation and personal success. By identifying career crafting as the mediating conduit, this study specifies how the abstract desire to contribute to the public good translates into concrete, satisfying career experiences, addressing a gap noted in prior work on public sector careers (Giraud et al., 2019). Thus, this study enriches the PSM construct by theorizing its active, agentic function in the career development of civil servants.

This study makes a second key contribution by theoretically extending the concept of career crafting into the public sector context, an underexplored domain in the extant literature. While career crafting is recognized as a proactive behavior that enhances work satisfaction (Diaa et al., 2024), empirical research has predominantly centered on corporate employees (Ge et al., 2023). The findings demonstrate that civil servants, even within the structured and stable environment characteristic of public institutions, actively engage in career crafting to pursue personal growth and career satisfaction. This extension is theoretically significant for two reasons. First, it challenges the passive stereotype of public employees and refines career crafting theory by showing its relevance beyond market-driven, private-sector dynamics. Second, by identifying PSM as a key antecedent and subjective career success as a core outcome, this research provides a contextualized theoretical framework for understanding why and toward what ends civil servants proactively shape their careers. This addresses a critical gap, as public sector careers, traditionally symbols of stability, now face challenges of disengagement and turnover (Hur & Abner, 2024). The research model thus enriches career crafting literature by anchoring it within the unique motivational (PSM) and structural realities of public administration, offering a more nuanced lens for understanding proactive career management in institutionalized settings.

Finally, this study makes a theoretical contribution by extending the model of proactive motivation proposed by Parker et al. (2010) into the domain of long-term career development within the public sector, thereby validating and refining its explanatory scope. While the model has been widely used to explain discrete workplace behaviors like voice and taking charge (Arshad et al., 2024; Liang et al., 2023), its application to sustained, self-directed career processes remain limited. This research addresses the gap and advances the model in two key ways. First, it theoretically positions PSM as a central enabling motivational state within the framework, demonstrating how this public service-specific drive activates the agentic behavior of career crafting. Second, the study specifies and tests a set of boundary conditions that elaborate the model’s underlying motivational mechanisms: individual-level FWSS strengthens future-oriented proactive motivation, while contextual visionary leadership fosters a supportive environment that legitimizes and reinforces goal alignment. By integrating these personal and contextual factors, the findings provide a more nuanced account of the motivational pathway from PSM to subjective career success. Thus, this study does not merely apply an existing framework; it expands the theoretical utility of the model of proactive motivation by demonstrating its robustness in explaining career-related agency within the structured context of public administration, offering a more integrated view of how stable traits, contextual signals, and motivational states jointly shape proactive career behaviors.

Practical Implications

This study has implications for the management practice of public organizations. First, public organizations should incorporate PSM into their human resource practices by screening for, developing, and promoting PSM among employees. Using evidence-based recruitment methods can help identify candidates with strong PSM from the outset. To sustain this focus, organizations should also implement incentive mechanisms and establish ongoing training frameworks that reinforce PSM. This approach encourages employees to engage in career crafting, thereby enhancing their sense of subjective career success. Second, public organizations should encourage career crafting as a strategic practice that benefits both employees and the organization. This can be supported through resources such as career development workshops, mentorship programs, and cross-departmental training. Fostering a culture that values feedback, learning, and innovation will further motivate initiative-taking among employees. Ultimately, these measures enhance individual well-being while strengthening organizational adaptability, performance, and talent retention in the public sector. Third, public organizations should actively cultivate and enhance the visionary leadership capabilities of their superiors. Visionary leadership can foster a strong sense of purpose and alignment, helping civil servants understand not only what the organization aims to achieve but also how their daily work supports these goals. To achieve this, public organizations need to invest in leadership development programs that build leaders’ skills in strategic communication, vision articulation, and employee engagement. Additionally, public organizations should carefully consider the impact of individual differences in FWSS when designing management practices. Employees with a clear and vivid vision of their future career selves tend to be more proactive and motivated in shaping their career paths. Public organizations can offer regular and targeted vocational training programs that help employees clarify their long-term career goals and develop the skills needed to achieve them.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study has several limitations that could guide future research. First, it focuses on the relationship between PSM and subjective career success using self-reported data. Although appropriate given public-sector constraints, career success also includes objective dimensions, which may interact with subjective perceptions (Ng et al., 2005). Future studies should incorporate objective indicators (e.g., promotion or salary) and longitudinal designs to examine how PSM affects objective outcomes and how these outcomes influence subjective career success. They could also consider short-term work outcomes, such as job satisfaction, to capture both immediate experiences and long-term career trajectories. Second, the sample is limited to civil servants in Beijing, which may constrain generalizability (Migchelbrink & Van de Walle, 2020). Beijing’s abundant resources and institutionalized career system may shape career crafting and perceptions of success (Ma, 2017). Although PSM is relatively stable (Vandenabeele, 2007), future research should test the model in other regions and cross-national contexts using multicity or multilevel designs to examine potential contextual boundary conditions. Third, while this study identifies career crafting as a key mediator, other psychological mechanisms may also operate. For example, high-PSM individuals may experience greater job satisfaction from fulfilling prosocial values, which could enhance subjective career success (Breaugh et al., 2017). Future research should explore multiple mediators and consider structural impediments, such as rigid promotion quotas and seniority-based advancement, as moderators through multilevel designs integrating individual and institutional factors. Finally, methodological limitations include using unidimensional scales for complex constructs like PSM and career crafting, which may obscure the effects of distinct dimensions (S. Kim et al., 2013). All measures relied on self-reports, but leadership-related variables could be assessed more objectively in future studies, for example, using natural language processing or large language models to analyze archival meeting data (Huang & Villadsen, 2023), enhancing validity and robustness.

Footnotes

Appendix A

Table A1.

Measurements and Item Descriptions.

Variables	Source	Item description
Public service motivation	Wright et al. (2013)	Meaningful public service is very important to me.
		I am often reminded by daily events about how dependent we are on one another.
		Making a difference in society means more to me than personal achievements.
		I am prepared to make enormous sacrifices for the good of society.
		I am not afraid to go to bat for the rights of others even if it means I will be ridiculed.
Career crafting	Tims and Akkermans (2020)	I spend time reflecting on my passions in my work and career.
		I deliberately think about what I would like to achieve in my career.
		I assess for myself what I really value in my career.
		I explore the possibilities available to me to continue developing myself.
		I make sure that significant people in my work are up to date about my performance and results.
		I deliberately show others what I am good at.
		I strengthen my career goals and make sure that they remain up to date.
		If I need to make a strong impression on others to attain my own goals, I make sure I clearly show them what I am capable of.
Subjective career success	Greenhaus et al. (1990)	I am satisfied with the success I have achieved in my career.
		I am satisfied with the progress I have made toward meeting my overall career goals.
		I am satisfied with the progress I have made toward meeting my goals for income.
		I am satisfied with the progress I have made toward meeting my goals for advancement.
		I am satisfied with the progress I have made toward meeting my goals for the development of new skills.
Future work self-salience	Strauss et al. (2012)	I can easily imagine my Future Work Self.
		The mental picture of my career future is very clear.
		My career future is very easy for me to imagine.
Visionary leadership	Kim et al. (2023)	My immediate leader makes plans and takes actions based on future goals.
		My immediate leader has a clear understanding of where we are heading.
		My immediate leader clearly articulates his/her vision of the future.

ORCID iD

Chenhui Zuo

Ethical Considerations

No ethical approval was necessary for this work. Institutional Review Board approval is not required for our study in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements (Measures for Ethical Review of Life Sciences and Medical Research Involving Human Beings of China; detailed information can be found at , accessed on 20 September 2023), as it did not entail clinical trials or manipulations involving humans or animals.

Consent to Participate

Written informed consent was obtained for anonymized individual information to be published in this article. Prior to data collection, we inform participants that the survey will collect their personal information. If they agree to engage in this survey, they can proceed; if not, they can withdraw.

Author Contributions

Shanghao Song: Conceptualization, Data curation, Methodology, Software, Writing—Original draft preparation. Yunsheng Shi: Writing—Original draft preparation. Haibo Yu: Funding acquisition, Visualization, Supervision. Chenhui Zuo: Conceptualization, Writing—Original draft preparation.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study is supported by the Research Start-up Fund for New Young Teachers of Capital University of Economics and Business [XRZ2026027].

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Author Biographies

Shanghao Song, PhD, is a lecturer with the School of Labor Economics, Capital University of Business and Economics. His research fields are public personnel management, organization behavior, and career management. Especially, he is interested in the topic of work design, strategic leadership, and learning from failure.

Yunsheng Shi, PhD, is a lecturer with Hebei Finance University, Baoding, China. His research fields are public personnel management and career management. Especially, he is interested in the topic of workplace proactive behavior and strategic leadership.

Haibo Yu is a professor with the School of Government, Beijing Normal University. He obtained his PhD degree from the Chinese Academy of Sciences. His research fields are human resource management, organization behavior, and career management. Especially, he is interested in the topic of career proactive behavior and strategic leadership.

Chenhui Zuo is currently working toward the PhD degree in Public Sector Human Resource Management with the School of Government, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. Her research interests include organizational behavior and behavioral public administration.

References

Abele

A. E.

Spurk

Volmer

(2011). The construct of career success: Measurement issues and an empirical example. Journal for Labour Market Research, 43(3), 195–206.

Afzal

M. F.

Hussain

Nawab

(2024). How wellbeing oriented HRM influence innovative work behavior? Through mediating role of proactive motivation. Journal of Business and Management Research, 3(1), 475–492.

Ahmad

Saad

(2020). The impact of Malaysian public sector in the relationship between transformational leadership styles and career development. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(3), 203–212.

Akkermans

Brenninkmeijer

Huibers

Blonk

R. W.

(2013). Competencies for the contemporary career: Development and preliminary validation of the career competencies questionnaire. Journal of Career Development, 40(3), 245–267.

Akkermans

Tims

(2017). Crafting your career: How career competencies relate to career success via job crafting. Applied Psychology, 66(1), 168–195.

Arshad

Hassan

Azam

(2024). How does managerial coaching influence knowledge sharing in the workplace? A perspective of proactive motivation model. Management Research Review, 47(11), 1833–1854.

Arthur

M. B.

Khapova

S. N.

Wilderom

C. P. M.

(2005). Career success in a boundaryless career world. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2), 177–202.

Ashforth

B. E.

(2001). Role transitions in organizational life: An identity-based perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Awan

Bel

Esteve

(2020). The benefits of PSM: An oasis or a mirage? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(4), 619–635.

10.

Bakker

A. B.

(2015). A job demands-resources approach to public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 723–732.

11.

Bernards

(2023). Do visionary and servant leaders reduce cognitive uncertainty of professionals? A study of team-based settings in public organizations. Public Management Review, 25(6), 1059–1081.

12.

Breaugh

Ritz

Alfes

(2017). Work motivation and public service motivation: Disentangling varieties of motivation and job satisfaction. Public Management Review, 20(10), 1423–1443.

13.

Bright

(2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference on the job satisfaction and turnover intentions of public employees? The American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 149–166.

14.

Bright

(2016). Is public service motivation a better explanation of nonprofit career preferences than government career preferences? Public Personnel Management, 45(4), 405–424.

15.

Brislin

R. W.

(1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216.

16.

Campbell

J. W.

(2025). Goal ambiguity and promotion fairness in public organizations: The mediating roles of training effectiveness, performance feedback, and job autonomy. Public Performance & Management Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2025.2549761.

17.

Chen

Wen

(2022). Gratitude expression to supervisors and subjective career success of civil servants: Evidence from China. Public Personnel Management, 51(1), 48–70.

18.

Cheung

G. W.

Rensvold

R. B.

(2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.

19.

Chughtai

(2018). Authentic leadership, career self-efficacy and career success: A cross-sectional study. Career Development International, 23(6/7), 595–607.

20.

Cohen

Duberley

(2015). Three faces of context and their implications for career: A study of public sector careers cut short. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 91, 189–202.

21.

Colakoglu

S. N.

(2011). The impact of career boundarylessness on subjective career success: The role of career competencies, career autonomy, and career insecurity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(1), 47–59.

22.

Dafou

(2018). Career boundaries and boundary-crossing by public sector employees: The case of Greek public education. Career Development International, 23(2), 197–211.

23.

De Simone

Cicotto

Pinna

Giustiniano

. (2016). Engaging public servants: Public service motivation, work engagement and work-related stress. Management Decision, 54(7), 1569–1594.

24.

De Vos

Akkermans

Van der Heijden

B. I. J. M

. (2019). From occupational choice to career crafting. In Gunz

Lazarova

Mayrhofer

(Eds.), The Routledge companion to career studies (pp. 128–142). Routledge.

25.

Diaa

N. M.

Abidin

A. Z. U.

Roller

(2024). Examining the relationship of career crafting, perceived employability, and subjective career success: The moderating role of job autonomy. Future Business Journal, 10(1), 16.

26.

Eby

L. T.

Butts

Lockwood

(2003). Predictors of success in the era of the boundaryless career. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 689–708.

27.

Enache

Sallan

J. M.

Simo

Fernandez

(2011). Career attitudes and subjective career success: Tackling gender differences. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 26(3), 234–250.

28.

Francois

(2000). Public service motivation as an argument for government provision. Journal of Public Economics, 78, 275–299.

29.

Gao

(2023). A new construct in career research: Career crafting. Behavioral Sciences, 13(1), 49.

30.

Giraud

Bernard

Trinchera

(2019). Early career values and individual factors of objective career success: The case of the French business graduates. Career Development International, 24(4), 350–382.

31.

Gould-Williams

J. S.

Mostafa

A. M. S.

Bottomley

(2015). Public service motivation and employee outcomes in the Egyptian public sector: Testing the mediating effect of person-organization fit. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(2), 597–622.

32.

Grant

A. M.

Dutton

J. E.

Rosso

B. D.

(2008). Giving commitment: Employee support programs and the prosocial sensemaking process. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 898–918.

33.

Greco

L. M.

Kraimer

M. L.

(2020). Goal-setting in the career management process: An identity theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(1), 40–57.

34.

Greenhaus

J. H.

Parasuraman

Wormley

W. M.

(1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 64–86.

35.

Griffin

M. A.

Parker

S. K.

Mason

C. M.

(2010). Leader vision and the development of adaptive and proactive performance: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 174–182.

36.

Guan

Guo

Bond

M. H.

Cai

Zhou

Zhu

Wang

Liu

Wang

(2014). New job market entrants’ future work self, career adaptability and job search outcomes: Examining mediating and moderating models. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85(1), 136–145.

37.

Guo

Mao

J. Y.

Huang

Zhang

(2022). Polishing followers’ future work selves! The critical roles of leader future orientation and vision communication. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 137, Article 103746.

38.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

(2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

39.

Hall

D. T.

Chandler

D. E.

(2005). Psychological success: When the career is a calling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2), 155–176.

40.

Hirschi

Lee

Porfeli

E. J.

Vondracek

F. W.

(2013). Proactive motivation and engagement in career behaviors: Investigating direct, mediated, and moderated effects. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(1), 31–40.

41.

Holt

S. B.

(2018). For those who care: The effect of public service motivation on sector selection. Public Administration Review, 78(3), 457–471.

42.

Homberg

McCarthy

Tabvuma

(2015). A meta-analysis of the relationship between public service motivation and job satisfaction. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 711–722.

43.

Z. X.

Gan

K. P.

Sun

G. Y.

Wang

(2025). Public service motivation and career choice intentions of social work students: The roles of altruistic motivation and professional values. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1517457.

44.

Huang

Villadsen

A. R.

(2023). Top managers in public organizations: A systematic literature review and future research directions. Public Administration Review, 83(6), 1618–1634.

45.

Hur

Abner

(2024). What makes public employees want to leave their job? A meta-analysis of turnover intention predictors among public sector employees. Public Administration Review, 84(1), 115–142.

46.

Jacobsen

C. B.

Bøgh Andersen

(2015). Is leadership in the eye of the beholder? A study of intended and perceived leadership practices and organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 75(6), 829–841.

47.

Jaskyte

(2017). Voluntary membership and well-being of nonprofit, government, and business employees. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(1), 358–378.

48.

Jiang

Wang

Peng

K. Z.

C. H.

(2023). Career proactivity: A bibliometric literature review and a future research agenda. Applied Psychology, 72(1), 144–184.

49.

Judge

T. A.

Weiss

H. M.

Kammeyer-Mueller

J. D.

Hulin

C. L.

(2017). Job attitudes, job satisfaction, and job affect: A century of continuity and of change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 356–374.

50.

Jung

C. S.

(2014). Organizational goal ambiguity and job satisfaction in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(4), 955–981.

51.

Khan

A. N.

Mehmood

Khan

N. A.

(2024). Visionary leadership and leaders’ burnout: A weekly diary analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 41(3), 1571–1600.

52.

Kim

Waldman

D. A.

Balthazard

P. A.

Ames

J. B.

(2023). Leader self-projection and collective role performance: A consideration of visionary leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 34(2), Article 101623.

53.

Kim

(2012). Does person-organization fit matter in the public-sector? Testing the mediating effect of person-organization fit in the relationship between public service motivation and work attitudes. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 830–840.

54.

Kim

Vandenabeele

Wright

B. E.

Andersen

L. B.

Cerase

F. P.

Christensen

R. K.

Desmarais

Koumenta

Leisink

Liu

Palidauskaite

Pedersen

L. H.

Perry

J. L.

Ritz

Taylor

De Vivo

(2013). Investigating the structure and meaning of public service motivation across populations: Developing an international instrument and addressing issues of measurement invariance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1), 79–102.

55.

Lee

J. Y.

Chen

C. L.

Kolokowsky

Hong

Siegel

J. T.

Donaldson

S. I.

(2021). Development and validation of the career crafting assessment (CCA). Journal of Career Assessment, 29(4), 717–736.

56.

Leeuwen

E.V.

Taris

Heuvel

Knies

Rensen

E.V.

Lammers

(2021). A career crafting training program: Results of an intervention study. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 664453.

57.

Liang

Zhang

Tian

(2023). No rules, no standards: Does due process voice appraisal system foster employee voice behavior? Current Psychology, 42(25), 21928–21944.

58.

Lin

Wang

Bamberger

P. A.

Zhang

Wang

Guo

Shi

Zhang

(2016). Leading future orientations for current effectiveness: The role of engagement and supervisor coaching in linking future work self salience to job performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 92, 145–156.

59.

Litano

M. L.

Major

D. A.

(2016). Facilitating a whole-life approach to career development: The role of organizational leadership. Journal of Career Development, 43(1), 52–65.

60.

Liu

Perry

J. L.

(2016). The psychological mechanisms of public service motivation. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 36(1), 4–30.

61.

W. C.

Kuo

C. C.

(2016). Internship performance and satisfaction in sports: Application of the proactive motivation model. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 18, 33–41.

62.

Guy

M. E.

(2018). Political skill, organizational justice, and career success in mainland China. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(2), 371–388.

63.

Luu

T. T.

(2021). Can humble leaders nurture employee well-being? The roles of job crafting and public service motivation. Personnel Review, 50(3), 789–811.

64.

(2017). Performance management and citizen satisfaction with the government: Evidence from Chinese municipalities. Public Administration, 95(1), 39–59.

65.

Tang

Yan

(2015). Public employees’ perceived promotion channels in Local China: Merit-based or guanxi-orientated? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 74(3), 283–297.

66.

Mascareño

Rietzschel

Wisse

(2020). Envisioning innovation: Does visionary leadership engender team innovative performance through goal alignment? Creativity and Innovation Management, 29(1), 33–48.

67.

Miao

Newman

Schwarz

Cooper

(2018). How leadership and public service motivation enhance innovative behavior. Public Administration Review, 78(1), 71–81.

68.

Migchelbrink

Van de Walle

(2020). When will public officials listen? A vignette experiment on the effects of input legitimacy on public officials’ willingness to use public participation. Public Administration Review, 80(2), 271–280.

69.

Mohd Rasdi

Ismail

Garavan

T. N

. (2011). Predicting Malaysian managers’ objective and subjective career success. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(17), 3528–3549.

70.

Muhammad

Anwarul

H. M.

Shabir

Jawad

Ali

Altaf

(2022). Political skill and career success: Exploring the mediating role of mentoring and moderating role of career adaptability. Sage Open, 12(1), 21582440221082149.

71.

Napitupulu

Haryono

Laksmi Riani

Sawitri

H. S. R.

Harsono

(2017). The impact of career development on employee performance: An empirical study of the public sector in Indonesia. International Review of Public Administration, 22(3), 276–299.

72.

T. W.

Eby

Sorenson

Feldman

(2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success. Personnel Psychology, 58, 367–408.

73.

T. W.

Feldman

D. C.

(2014). Subjective career success: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85(2), 169–179.

74.

T. W.

Hsu

D. Y.

Parker

S. K.

(2021). Received respect and constructive voice: The roles of proactive motivation and perspective taking. Journal of Management, 47(2), 399–429.

75.

Zhu

Bian

Pan

(2024). How does leader career calling stimulate employee career growth? The role of career crafting and supervisor-subordinate guanxi. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 45(1), 21–34.

76.

O’Brien

K. M.

(1996). The influence of psychological separation and parental attachment on the career development of adolescent women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48(3), 257–274.

77.

Parker

S. K.

Bindl

U. K.

Strauss

(2010). Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. Journal of Management, 36(4), 827–856.

78.

Parker

S. K.

Williams

H. M.

Turner

(2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 636–652.

79.

Perry

J. L.

(1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(1), 5–22.

80.

Perry

J. L.

Brudney

J. L.

Coursey

Littlepage

(2008). What drives morally committed citizens? A study of the antecedents of public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 445–458.

81.

Perry

J. L.

Wise

L. R.

(1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50, 367–373.

82.

Piatak

J. S.

(2015). Altruism by job sector: Can public sector employees lead the way in rebuilding social capital? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(3), 877–900.

83.

Piatak

J. S.

(2016). Public service motivation, prosocial behaviours, and career ambitions. International Journal of Manpower, 37(5), 804–821.

84.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J. Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

85.

Ritz

Brewer

G. A.

Neumann

(2016). Public service motivation: A systematic literature review and outlook. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 414–426.

86.

Rose

R. P.

(2013). Preferences for careers in public work. American Review of Public Administration, 43(4), 416–437.

87.

Song

Gao

Shi

Wang

(2025). Beacons of vision navigate career development: How and when does visionary leadership lead to followers’ career prospect? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 46(8), 1100–1127.

88.

Spurk

Hirschi

Dries

(2019). Antecedents and outcomes of objective versus subjective career success: Competing perspectives and future directions. Journal of Management, 45(1), 35–69.

89.

Stam

D. A.

Van Knippenberg

Wisse

(2010). The role of regulatory fit in visionary leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 499–518.

90.

Strauss

Griffin

M. A.

Parker

S. K.

(2012). Future work selves: How salient hoped-for identities motivate proactive career behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 580–598.

91.

Strauss

Parker

S. K.

O’Shea

(2017). When does proactivity have a cost? Motivation at work moderates the effects of proactive work behavior on employee job strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 100, 15–26.

92.

Sun

J. Y.

(2016). For public causes or personal interests? Examining public service motives in the Chinese context. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 55(4), 476–497.

93.

Talluri

S. B.

Strauss

Newman

Voigt

(2025). Future work self salience: A systematic review and future research agenda. Applied Psychology, 74(3), Article e70018.

94.

Tao

Wen

(2022). Demystifying the components of public service motivation among young public servants in China: A qualitative inquiry. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 45(3), 248–273.

95.

Tims

Akkermans

(2020). Job and career crafting to fulfill individual career pathways. In Hedge

J. W.

Carter

G. W.

(Eds.), Career pathways: From school to retirement (pp. 165–190). Oxford University Press.

96.

Tuan

L. T.

(2016). How servant leadership nurtures knowledge sharing: The mediating role of public service motivation. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(1), 91–108.

97.

Tuan

L. T.

(2018). Behind the influence of job crafting on citizen value co-creation with the public organization: Joint effects of paternalistic leadership and public service motivation. Public Management Review, 20(10), 1533–1561.

98.

Utomo

W. A.

Udin

U. D. I. N.

Haryono

(2022). Visionary leadership and employee quality in the public service sector. International Journal of Applied Economics, Finance and Accounting, 12(2), 31–37.

99.

Valero

Hirschi

Strauss

(2015). Hope in adolescent careers: Mediating effects of work motivation on career outcomes in Swiss apprentices. Journal of Career Development, 42(5), 381–395.

100.

Vandenabeele

(2007). Toward a public administration theory of public service motivation: An institutional approach. Public Management Review, 9(4), 545–556.

101.

Van der Heijden

B. I. J. M.

Vermeeren

. (2025). Sustainable career indicators in public sector employment: Exploring the influence of job resources and HRM practices. Public Management Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2025.2596785

102.

Van der Voet

Steijn

. (2021). Team innovation through collaboration: How visionary leadership spurs innovation via team cohesion. Public Management Review, 23(9), 1275–1294.

103.

Van Knippenberg

Stam

. (2014). Visionary leadership. In Day

D. V.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations (pp. 241–259). Oxford University Press.

104.

Vidwans

M. P.

(2016). Exploring career success with the new paradigm of career crafting. Lincoln University.

105.

Voigt

Strauss

(2024). How future work self salience shapes the effects of interacting with artificial intelligence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 155, Article 104054.

106.

Wang

Gan

K. P.

Wei

H. Y.

Sun

A. Q.

Wang

Y. C.

Zhou

X. M.

(2024). Public service motivation and public employees’ turnover intention: The role of job satisfaction and career growth opportunity. Personnel Review, 53(1), 99–118.

107.

Wang

Lam

Chen

Geng

(2025). Future organizational identification: Visionary leadership gives me foresight to identify with my organization in the future. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 46(4), 566–579.

108.

Wei

Chan

S. H. J.

Lin

(2024). Ambition and subjective career success: A nonlinear relationship. Personality and Individual Differences, 222, Article 112600.

109.

Williams

L. J.

Anderson

S. E.

(1994). An alternative approach to method effects by using latent-variable models: Applications in organizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 323–331.

110.

Wright

B. E.

Pandey

S. K.

(2008). Public service motivation and the assumption of person-organization fit: Testing the mediating effect of value congruence. Administration & Society, 40(5), 502–521.

111.

Wright

B. E.

Christensen

R. K.

Pandey

S. K.

(2013). Measuring public service motivation: Exploring the equivalence of existing global measures. International Public Management Journal, 16(2), 197–223.

112.

(2025). Easing youth career distress: Impacts of future work self salience, goal engagement, and calling motivation. Journal of Career Development, 52(6), 818–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/08948453251379855

113.

Guan

Zheng

Hou

(2018). Career adaptability with or without career identity: How career adaptability leads to organizational success and individual career success? Journal of Career Assessment, 26(4), 717–731.

114.

Lin

Wang

Wei

Wang

Guo

Shi

(2016). The role of affective commitment and future work self salience in the abusive supervision-job performance relationship. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(1), 28–45.

115.

Zacher

(2014). Career adaptability predicts subjective career success above and beyond personality traits and core self-evaluations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(1), 21–30.

116.

Zeng

Bai

(2025). The effect of future work self-salience on proactive career behaviors: The longitudinal intermediation of cognitive adjustment at work. The Career Development Quarterly, 73(2), 151–160.

117.

Zhang

Inness

(2019). Transformational leadership and employee voice: A model of proactive motivation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(7), 777–790.