Global market change and become more competitive. Recent studies showed that modern careers expected to use adaptive, proactive and self-managed approaches to deal with uncertain environment (Waters, Briscoe, Hall, & Wang, 2014). Therefore, protean career attitude is important for employees to survive this challenging work environment. People with protean career attitude do not bond their careers to an organization (Waters et al., 2014). They experience superior responsibility for their career selection and opportunities, and value their own freedom, growth and development as a success (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among the types of protean career attitude, and task and contextual performance. A further subsidiary aim was to investigate the “Protean” type of protean career attitude and its task and contextual performance comparing with the other three types of protean career attitude Dependent, Rigid and Reactive. Using a quantitative approach, online and paper-based questionnaires were conducted and collected in this study. The sample was 302 employees from Mongolia. IBM SPSS 23, and SPSS AMOS 23 were used for data analysis. The result of this study show that the “Dependent” and “Protean” types of protean career attitude have significant, positive correlation with task and contextual performance. The results also showed that “Protean” type has significantly higher task performance and significantly higher contextual performance than Dependent and Rigid types, but not significantly higher than Reactive type

Global market change and become more competitive. Recent studies showed that modern careers expected to use adaptive, proactive and self-managed approaches to deal with uncertain environment (Waters, Briscoe, Hall, & Wang, 2014). Therefore, protean career attitude is important for employees to survive this challenging work environment. People with protean career attitude do not bond their careers to an organization (Waters et al., 2014). They experience superior responsibility for their career selection and opportunities, and value their own freedom, growth and development as a success (Chin & Rasdi, 2014). The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among the types of protean career attitude, and task and contextual performance. A further subsidiary aim was to investigate the “Protean” type of protean career attitude and its task and contextual performance comparing with the other three types of protean career attitude Dependent, Rigid and Reactive. Using a quantitative approach, online and paper-based questionnaires were conducted and collected in this study. The sample was 302 employees from Mongolia. IBM SPSS 23, and SPSS AMOS 23 were used for data analysis. The result of this study show that the “Dependent” and “Protean” types of protean career attitude have significant, positive correlation with task and contextual performance. The results also showed that “Protean” type has significantly higher task performance and significantly higher contextual performance than Dependent and Rigid types, but not significantly higher than Reactive type

REFERENCES

Aguinis, H. (2014). Performance management. London, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Brummelhuis. L. L. (2012). Work engagement, performance, and active learning: The role of conscientiousness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 555-564.

Baruch, Y. (2014). The development and validation of a measure for protean career orientation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(19), 2702-2723.

Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99-109.

Briscoe, J. P. (2015). Handbook of research on sustainable careers. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.

Briscoe, J. P., & Hall, D. T. (2006). The interplay of boundaryless and protean careers: Combinations and implications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 4-18.

Briscoe, J. P., Hoobler, J. M., & Byle, K. A. (2010). Do “protean” employees make better leaders? The answer is in the eye of the beholder. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 783-795.

Briscoe, J. P., Hall, D. T., & DeMuth, R. L. F. (2006). Protean and boundary less careers: An empirical exploration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 30-47.

Briscoe, P. J., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2009). The “new career” and organizational commitment. Career Development International, 14(3), 242-260.

Cabrera, E. F. (2009). Protean organizations: Reshaping work and careers to retain female talent. Career Development International, 14(2), 186-201.

Carmeli, A., & Gefen. D. (2005). The relationship between work commitment models and employee withdrawal intentions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 63-86.

Cerdina, J. L., & Pargneux, M. L. (2014). The impact of expatriates’ career characteristics on career and job satisfaction, and intention to leave: An objective and subjective fit approach. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(14), 2033-2049.

Chen, C. F., & Kao, Y. L. (2012). Moderating effects of work engagement and job tenure on burnout-performance among flight attendants. Journal of Air Transport Management, 25(1), 61-63.

Chiaburu, D. S. & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, ocbs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1082–1103.

Chiaburu, D. S., Oh, I. S., Wang, J., & Stoverink, A. C. (2017). A bigger piece of the pie: The relative importance of affiliative and change-oriented citizenship and task performance in predicting overall job performance. Human Resource Management Review, 27(1), 97-107.

Chin, W. S., & Rasdi, R. M. (2014). Protean career development: Exploring the individuals, organizational and job-related factors. Asian Social Science, 10(21), 203-215.

Davis, J.A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

De Vos, A., & Soens, N. (2008). Protean attitude and career success: The mediating role of self-management. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(3), 449-456.

Demerouti, E., Xanthopoulou, D., Tsaousis, I., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Disentangling task and contextual performance A multitrait-multimethod approach. Journal of Personnal Psychology, 13(2), 59-69.

Ducker, P. F. (1999). Managing Oneself. Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 64-74.

Edwards, B. E., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W., & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between facets of job satisfaction and task and contextual performance. Applied Psychology, 57(3), 441-465.

Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person-organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(2), 254-275.

Hair, J. F., Black W. C. Anderson R. E., Babin B. J., & Anderson R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis.Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Hall, D. T. (2004). The protean career: A quarter-century journey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 1-13.

Hall, D.T., & Goodale, J.G. (1986). Human resource management: Strategy, design and implement. Chicago, IL: Foresmen Company.

Herman, J. B. (1973). Are situational contingencies limiting job attitude-job performance relationships? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10(2), 208-224.

Inkson, K. (2006). Protean and boundaryless careers as metaphors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 48-63.

Lin, Y. C. (2015). Are you a protean talent? The influence of protean career attitude, learning-goal orientation and perceived internal and external employability. Career Development International, 20(7), 753-772.

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2008). The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 392-423.

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldmen, D. C. (2009). How broadly does education contribute to job performance? Personnel Psychology, 62(1), 89-134.

Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric methods. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Patton, W., & McMahon, M. (2006). Career development and systems theory: Connecting theory and practice. Rotterdam, Netherlands : Sense Publishers.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B, Lee, J. Y, & Podsakoff N. B. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.

Research Center of Mongolian Parliament (2012). Public Administration System and its renewal of Mongolia: Comparative analysis with other countries. Retrieved from: http://forum.parliament.mn/medias/7c1a5b00-77ba-42f8-85b6-5ba04d682ae5.pdf

Segers, J., Inceoglu, I., Vloeberghs, D., Bartram, D., & Henderickx, E. (2008). Protean and boundaryless careers: A study on potential motivators. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(2), 212-230.

Shaffer, L. S., & Zalewski, J. M. (2011). Career advising in a VUCA environment. NACADA Journal, 31(1), 64-74.

Smith, C. A., Organ, D. O., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663.

Thorndike, E.L. (1913). The psychology of learning, education psychology. New York, NY: Columbia University.

United Nations Development Programme (2016), Human Development Report 2016. Retrieved from: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf

US Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs. (2016). 2016 Investment Climate Statements. Retrieved from: https://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2016/eap/254299.htm

Waters, L., Briscoe, J. P., Hall, D. T., & Wang, L. (2014). Protean career attitudes during unemployment and reemployment: A longitudinal perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(3), 405-419.

Wikipedia. (2016). Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proteus

World Bank (2015). World Development Indicators. Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/.../9781464804403.pdf

World Economic Forum (2016). The Future of Jobs. Retrieved from: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_FOJ_Executive_Summary_Jobs.pdf

Yahya, K. K., & Othman, S. Z. (2004). Relationship between organizational career management and individual performance. International Journal of Management Studies, 11(2), 73-90.

Yang, C. L., & Hwang, M. (2014). Personality traits and simultaneous reciprocal influences between job performance and job satisfaction. Chinese Management Studies, 8(1), 6-26.