When Staying Is Dissatisfying: Examining When and Why Turnover Cognitions Affect Stayers’ Career Satisfaction

Abstract

This study examines when and why turnover cognitions affect stayers’ subsequent career satisfaction. To develop our hypotheses, we build on and compare two theoretical perspectives, that is, the insufficient justification perspective and regret theory. Hypotheses were tested using two studies with Belgian employees. The baseline hypothesis that initial turnover cognitions are related with lower subsequent career satisfaction received support in both studies. In Study 1, using two-wave data from 226 employees in four organizations, we tested whether the turnover cognitions–subsequent career satisfaction relationship was moderated by four contextual factors (i.e., internal job transitions, lack of external job opportunities, on-the-job embeddedness, and off-the-job embeddedness). We found marginal support for a mitigating role of internal job transitions, support for a mitigating role of lack of external job opportunities, and support for an amplifying role of off-the-job embeddedness. We found no moderation effect of on-the-job embeddedness. In Study 2, using three-wave information from 705 employees in seven organizations, we tested and found support for the mediating role of justifiability and regret. Overall, this study shows that turnover cognitions have consequences when people end up staying in their organization, which calls for more theoretical and empirical work on staying despite preceding turnover cognitions in order to improve our understanding of the complexity and dynamic nature of the turnover/retention phenomenon.