Pathways to Sustainable Careers: Exploring Motivational Profiles Through Latent Class Analysis

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify motivational profiles in sustainable career trajectories via emerging latent class methods using a multilevel schema between engagement in sustainable career practices, developing and utilizing job competency—a key marker for human capital development—and leader–member interaction. Using latent class analysis (LCA), we further identify different types of motivational profiles that reflect the principle and adaptable nature with which individuals can relate their sustainability values to career decisions. Results indicate large practical differences within latent classes, evidencing higher career adaptability and sustainability principles congruence in some groups. These differences highlight that intrinsic motivation, adaptability, and elements connected to the sector drive sustainable career engagement that should ensure enduring satisfaction with commitment to a chosen profession. In explaining why sustainability drives career advancement, this study takes a theoretical standpoint from three overarching theories: Career Construction Theory, Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), and Sustainable Career Theory. The practical recommendations are that companies must offer programs at the sector level to increase career adaptability (readiness) and help employees build sustainable careers. This study calls attention to the importance of producing participative content that is demanded by organizations seeking greater resilience, well-being in work contexts, and their long-lasting survival as institutions.

1. Introduction

In some industry sectors, such as finance, careers in sustainability have become mainstream, reflecting an integration of environmental, economic, and social aspects to support long-term sustainability and accountability [1]. These sustainable career pathways, undergirded by the principles of sustainable development, attempt to align individual career goals with broader societal imperatives, including ecosystem conservation, human rights, social justice, and economic resilience [2]. The growing need to address climate change, resource depletion, and social injustice has led to increased demand for transformative professionals capable of integrating sustainable practices across multiple industries, ultimately supporting the global transition toward sustainability [3].

At the organizational level, ecological and societal constraints have prompted businesses worldwide to prioritize positions focused on sustainability efforts, such as reducing carbon footprints, improving resource efficiency, and promoting corporate social responsibility. These positions encompass not only traditional “green” industries but also extend to sectors like healthcare, banking, and education, indicating the widespread integration of sustainability principles within firms [4]. Indeed, the sustainability career field emphasizes adaptability and resilience—qualities that enable professionals to tackle evolving environmental challenges and navigate a dynamic regulatory landscape [5].

The current new economy, changes in work patterns, uncertainties in career structures, and sudden job losses brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic have made it critically important for individuals to maintain the sustainability of their careers. Employees are shifting from the expectation of lifelong employment to the need to preserve their employability [6,7,8]. In other words, career sustainability is conceptualized as the capacity to create, enhance, test, and maintain an individual’s adaptability, placing human sustainability at its core [9]. Therefore, a sustainable career is characterized by achieving continuity under changing conditions and by the development, preservation, and renewal of career-related resources—including human and social capital (e.g., skills, credentials, reputation, and relationships)—which are tailored to the individual. The dynamic nature of the sustainable career concept also necessitates a holistic approach that incorporates all significant perspectives in career decision-making processes.

In this turbulent career environment, the concept of “sustainability” has been applied by career researchers as a lens to examine individuals’ ongoing efforts to develop a meaningful and fulfilling career experience. The emerging literature on sustainable careers defines a sustainable career as one in which individuals can enhance their skills, build motivation, and secure long-term work opportunities while positively influencing their career development [10]. Additionally, “sustainable careers enable individuals to experience positive career outcomes in the long term in ways that promote both organizational and individual effectiveness” [11].

The concept of a sustainable career remains underexplored in the literature. As employees are increasingly likely to remain in the workforce longer due to new social policies, and as the integration of artificial intelligence and robotics into work environments accelerates, it has become essential for employees to identify motivational pathways to sustain their careers. Adapting to technology, cultivating learning agility, and navigating careers effectively provide competitive advantages for sustainable careers. Furthermore, work dexterity enhances long-term employability, aligning with the temporal dimension of sustainable careers, and contributes to their motivational impact. A workforce that can quickly adapt to changing environments is crucial for sustaining an organization’s competitive advantage [12,13]. Building sustainable careers in this context can reduce organizational costs and mitigate the negative effects of career shocks, such as resignations. Additionally, through job crafting, employees engage in autonomous behaviors like job enlargement and enrichment, which foster success and achievement motivation in job autonomy. This intrinsic motivation boosts resource-seeking behaviors and alleviates concerns about challenging job demands, ultimately enhancing psychological empowerment. From this perspective, the concept of sustainable careers—defined through dimensions of health, happiness, and time—can act as a motivational tool. Empirical research has supported that approach mastery predicts individuals’ perceived employability [14], career competencies [15], career satisfaction and commitment [16], and objective career advancements such as promotions [17].

Individuals with high career sustainability tend to have a greater internal evaluation of their career sustainability, which increases the likelihood of reshaping their daily work to align with sustainable career goals. People are intrinsically motivated to acquire, maintain, and expand personally valuable resources, prioritizing resource loss prevention, followed by resource acquisition and the creation of resource surpluses when making resource allocation decisions [9]. Career sustainability encourages individuals to engage in job-crafting behaviors. Employees who maintain strong relationships with their managers gain more supervisory trust and resources compared to others, providing them with greater opportunities to advance and initiate proactive actions. Leader–member exchange (LMX) helps employees access critical resources (e.g., job autonomy) necessary for job crafting [18]. Employees with high-quality LMX relationships feel supported, making it more likely for their proactive behaviors to be accepted. In this context, they enhance relational work dexterity through managerial support, fostering a sense of security and psychological preparedness against future uncertainties. Since learning situations involve the development of new knowledge and skills through interactions with others, employees exhibiting high LMX will derive their motivational resources from the trust and autonomy provided by their managers. This creates a conducive environment for building their capacity for career sustainability.

1.1. Career Agility

In fields like sustainability, where roles often evolve with societal demands, career agility—the ability to adapt and shift within one’s career path—is essential.. This concept aligns with Social Cognitive Career Theory, which emphasizes self-efficacy and conscientiousness as key factors in career success [2]. Individuals with high career agility can readily redirect their focus or acquire new skills, building resilience and enhancing their ability to succeed in sustainability roles [19]. This adaptability not only enriches individual career satisfaction but also enables organizations to stay responsive and innovative amid shifting environmental and social landscapes.

1.2. Job Proficiency

Job proficiency is defined by De Vos and Van der Heijden as the extent to which an individual possesses the skills and knowledge necessary for effective performance, particularly relevant in sustainability roles where specialized expertise is often required [20]. High proficiency contributes to job satisfaction and strengthens long-term career commitment by bolstering individuals’ confidence in their roles [5]. In sustainability fields, proficiency involves technical skills, such as environmental management, and interpersonal skills, like teamwork and problem-solving, which are vital for addressing complex sustainability challenges [4]. By improving job proficiency, individuals are better equipped to advance sustainability goals, benefiting both personal and organizational objectives.

1.3. Leader–Member Interaction

Leader–member interaction refers to the quality of relationships between leaders and their team members, significantly impacting job satisfaction, motivation, and career advancement [21]. Supportive and positive interactions create an environment where employees feel valued, motivating them to engage in sustainability initiatives [22]. Effective leader–member relationships are especially crucial in sustainability roles, as leaders provide direction, resources, and motivation toward achieving corporate sustainability objectives. High-quality leader–member exchanges enhance career satisfaction and retention, underscoring the role of supportive leadership in shaping sustainable career pathways [19].

1.4. Problem Statement

While the demand for sustainability-oriented roles is growing, there remains a lack of granular data to understand with robust confidence what motivates and dissuades people from pursuing these professional pathways or whether motives differ across different types of professionals. Despite this, a lot of the current literature treats sustainability goals as monolithic and does not capture that they can depend on (i) individual motivations and (ii) sectoral effects, where, in some cases, positive synergy exists. Such a gap limits our understanding of the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations with job happiness, resilience, and sustained engagement in sustainability positions [1,4]. Perhaps one of the reasons for this gap is that a more nuanced understanding of motivational diversity could be essential to inform targeted career development programs and ensure employee satisfaction aligns with strategic organizational goals, including sustainability objectives.

This research can be positioned to address a major gap and explore different motivational profiles within sustainable careers, using LCA (latent class analysis) to identify underlying patterns of motivation. Existing research, however, has primarily focused on broader motives for sustainability with very little attention to variation in career flexibility or job competencies across protégé characteristics and how they influence the effect of leader–member dyad. The study draws from Career Construction Theory, Social Cognitive Career Theory, and Sustainable Career Theory to uncover different perspectives on sustainability-driven career motivations. Companies may use the outputs to build even more personalized and durable career paths. The purpose of this study is to identify how sustainable engagement may differ depending on the type of motivation, helping explain when and why intrinsic work motives are more beneficial. It is now easier for you to brainstorm sector-specific solutions that could allow employees to synchronize their values with sustainability and keep them happy long enough.

1.5. Research Purpose

We aim to identify distinct motivational profiles in sustainable careers by using an algorithm that clusters individuals based on their levels of engagement with practices and the aspects related to career agility. We then use latent class analysis (LCA) to identify distinctive motivational profiles that align with sustainable career paths. The following hypotheses provide a comprehensive structure of these relationships guided by relevant career and motivational theories:

1.

H1: Individuals can be categorized into latent classes based on their motivations and behaviors related to sustainable careers, reflecting diverse approaches to career development and engagement with sustainability.

2.

H2: Latent classes with stronger engagement in sustainable career-related practices will have distinct, personalized career trajectories incentivized by personal thoughts and feelings about the environment as well as motivations for their actions. Building on Career Construction Theory (CCT), CCT holds that women, in general, have been more skilled than men at carving out careers centered around purposeful stories, and Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) argues the importance of self-efficacy coupled with environmental reinforcements, which may also play a larger role for some individuals. Sustainable Career Theory also underscores the idea that sustainable career engagement sustains perceptions of continuity, meaning, and adaptability and facilitates enduring development throughout a life span.

1.6. Highlighting Novelty

• The present study integrates both aspects of careers in theories related to sustainability into a four-dimensional structure that encompasses motivational profile configurations. Focusing on the intrinsic motives and professional aims, this research adds to an understanding of sustaining career engagement and development.
• The use of LCA enabled the identification of five classes in terms of career motivations and pathways, giving insight into unique emergent patterns from within this populationomics field. This methodology offers a better understanding of how different motivational profiles predict sustainable career choices, generating direct implications for counselor practice and organizational support to further the cause of promoting sustainable careers.

2. Theoretical and Literature Framework

2.1. Theoretical Framework

2.1.1. Career Construction Theory

Career development and Career Construction Theory posits that individuals actively create their own career paths by constructing personal narratives that make sense of work-related events and experiences. Career construction theory explains how adaptability, personal narratives, and a sense of control interact with self-concepts, shaping the way individuals navigate choice points in career transitions to align with their constructivist beliefs [1]. In fields like sustainability, Career Contribution Theory (CCT) is often applied, as practitioners in these areas are motivated to integrate personal values with professional actions that provide societal benefits, such as environmental health goals [23]. This supports the notion that sustainable careers are recursive, involving continuous self-construction and adaptation rather than following a traditional stagewise path [24].

Career Construction Theory (CCT) provides a narrative-driven perspective that emphasizes how individuals actively construct meaningful career pathways and adapt to evolving professional contexts. This theory highlights that intrinsic narratives and personal values play a critical role in aligning career paths with an individual’s sense of purpose and meaning. Furthermore, it underscores the importance of adaptability and resilience, demonstrating how individuals navigate and respond to the changing demands of their professional environments. By focusing on these dynamic processes, CCT offers valuable insights into the alignment between personal values and career choices, particularly within sustainability-focused roles.

2.1.2. Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT)

Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), first proposed by Lent, Brown, and Hackett, identifies the factors influencing career interests, goals, and actions, emphasizing self-efficacy beliefs within a societal context, outcome expectations, and personal goals working in tandem [2]. SCCT highlights the environmental factors that support or hinder career development, such as mentorship, financial resources, and organizational culture [25]. In sustainability careers, SCCT sheds light on how professionals engage with adversity and leverage support systems to achieve alignment between personal values and professional goals. The theory’s emphasis on self-efficacy and adaptability is fundamental to understanding the resilience often reported by sustainability professionals as they manage complex roles [26].

Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) offers a conceptual model that explains the interplay of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and environmental supports in shaping career motivations and decisions. This framework positions variables such as career motivations, career goals, and career sustainability as central to understanding how individuals engage with their career trajectories. For example, self-efficacy and outcome expectations influence the motivations driving individuals to pursue specific career paths, while career goals reflect aspirations shaped by perceived capabilities and anticipated outcomes. Additionally, SCCT underscores the role of environmental supports and challenges, illustrating how workplace contexts influence long-term career engagement and adaptability. By integrating these elements, SCCT provides a comprehensive lens for examining how both personal and contextual factors contribute to sustainable career development.

2.1.3. Sustainable Career Theory

Sustainable Career Theory, a more recent framework, posits that careers are “a prolonged sequence of work experiences, including transitions, reflecting an individual’s ability to monitor career-related changes over time through adaptability” [20]. According to this theory, sustainable careers are characterized by a balance between individual career needs and job opportunities, adapting to dynamic work contexts and changing life circumstances over time [19]. For sustainability professionals, Sustainable Career Theory provides a valuable perspective on how alignment between personal values and career pursuits fosters career satisfaction and resilience. By focusing on engagement and adaptability, this theory enhances our understanding of how sustainability careers can not only satisfy individual sense-making but also sustain long-term fulfillment and flexibility [27].

2.2. Sustainability Careers

Interest in sustainability careers has surged as more individuals align their career aspirations with society’s environmental and ethical movements. Research suggests that a mix of intrinsic motivations (e.g., “doing what is right” and concern for the environment) and extrinsic motivations drive people toward sustainability careers, which is consistent with recent studies on motivation in sustainability competencies. Typically, these motivations stem from intrinsic, value-based goals that emphasize benefiting society, which instills long-term career satisfaction [19]. Additionally, existing research has shown that individuals in sustainability roles vary widely in their skill profiles, with some adopting a generalist, adaptable approach, while others specialize with limited flexibility [21]. This variation highlights the need for further studies to explore diverse motivational profiles within sustainability careers and the range of drivers that influence them.

Healthcare professionals face unique challenges in building sustainable careers due to high stress and burnout risks. Resilience training programs, such as the model developed by [28], have shown positive outcomes in reducing burnout and improving coping mechanisms. These programs align with Sustainable Career Theory by fostering adaptability and resilience in high-pressure environments. In the education sector, professional development models that enhance teacher adaptability, such as those described by [29], emphasize the role of adaptive teaching practices in promoting career sustainability and instructional purpose. Emergency services represent another high-stress environment where career sustainability is critical. Reference [30] highlights the development and validation of a career resilience instrument for CDC emergency responders, focusing on cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions that support long-term career engagement.

Studies have linked career sustainability to various antecedents such as career competencies [31], human resource practices [32], career adaptability [33], and career shocks [29]. While sustainable careers are gaining increasing attention in career literature, the field is still considered to be in its early stages of development [34]. A contemporary approach to careers, the sustainable career model, is defined by three groups of indicators: health, happiness, and productivity. According to the authors, health encompasses both physical and mental well-being, reflecting the dynamic alignment of a career with an individual’s mental and physical capacities. Happiness relates to the dynamic alignment of a career with an individual’s values, career goals, or needs related to work-life balance and personal development. Productivity, on the other hand, includes both strong performance in the individual’s current job and high employability or potential career prospects in the future [8]. This model highlights the multidimensional nature of sustainable careers, emphasizing the importance of physical and mental well-being, alignment with personal values and goals, and long-term career viability.

In the field of sustainable career studies, Kossek and Ollier-Malaterre [10] investigated the role of working hours and workload in achieving sustainable careers within organizational contexts. Their findings revealed that excessive workloads could harm career sustainability. Similarly, Richardson and McKenna [35] studied career sustainability among professional athletes, highlighting that resources such as family support and education play a crucial role in fostering career sustainability. Another example comes from Baldridge and Kulkarni [36], who demonstrated that individuals with hearing impairments could sustain their careers by redefining their professional identities. Research on solo workers has addressed the facilitating and hindering aspects of sustainable careers, finding that career self-management and proactivity have a positive impact on career sustainability. Castro et al. [37] emphasized that maintaining career sustainability during transitions involves not only leveraging personal resources—such as self-reflection, self-directed learning, and social capital—but also actively identifying and utilizing key career catalysts to foster engagement. Tordera et al. [31] identified human resource (HR) practices and employee age as key antecedents of employee well-being and performance, which are integral components of the sustainable career model. Their research also highlighted the importance of context, such as organizational and institutional factors, in shaping sustainable careers [38]. Organizations play a critical role in promoting sustainable careers through HR policies and practices. By providing employees with diverse resources and imposing demands that balance performance and well-being, organizations contribute significantly to the development of sustainable careers [34].

2.3. Latent Class Analysis (LCA)

Latent Class Analysis (LCA) is a statistical method used to identify groups of individuals based on observed variables originating in psychological and educational research. Career scholars utilize LCA to uncover motivational profiles that predict different career outcomes, including those linked to occupational challenges [39]. In the context of career studies, LCA captures subgroups based on preferences for certain professional behaviors and career engagement patterns, as well as the extent to which individuals prioritize biodiversity and environmental relevance [40]. For instance, LCA can distinguish between clusters of individuals who pursue sustainability roles for intrinsic rewards and those who are driven by extrinsic factors, such as career stability or financial incentives [41]. Through identifying these latent profiles, LCA sheds light on the distinct pathways individuals follow in sustainability careers, revealing how personal values and organizational influences shape career adaptability and success.

2.4. Integration of Theories and Contributions

The integration of SCCT, CCT, and Sustainable Career Theory provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the findings of this study. SCCT highlights the interplay of self-efficacy, environmental supports, and outcome expectations, emphasizing how external factors shape career trajectories [42]. CCT complements this perspective by focusing on the narrative-driven process through which individuals align their personal values and professional goals, emphasizing adaptability and resilience [43]. Sustainable Career Theory adds to this framework by highlighting the importance of long-term well-being, alignment with values, and continuous development [44]. For instance, the identification of latent motivational profiles in this study aligns with the principles of all three theories. Participants with high adaptability and strong leader–member interactions demonstrated career satisfaction, reflecting SCCT’s emphasis on environmental reinforcements and self-efficacy [45]. CCT’s narrative-driven framework was evident in how participants constructed meaningful career paths aligned with their values [46]. Finally, Sustainable Career Theory was reflected in participants’ ability to sustain long-term career satisfaction through adaptability and alignment with personal and organizational goals [47]. Together, these theoretical perspectives offer actionable insights for promoting sustainable careers and enhancing resilience in various professional contexts.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Design

A cross-sectional survey was developed to investigate the functioning and meaning of various career motivations, aspirations, and associated factors in a sustainable labor market for sustainability professionals. The survey was disseminated online to ensure widespread participation across different industries and regions, attracting individuals interested in or involved with sustainability. The use of this methodological approach—Latent Class Analysis (LCA)—is consistent with a long-history of career research investigating motivational patterns. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) performed in R (Version 4.3.2, R Core Team, 2023) via the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN)—is consistent with a long history of career research investigating motivational patterns.

In this study, the latent profiles were derived using a comprehensive set of variables, including career motivations, career goals, and other related factors. While the term “motivational profiles” was initially used, we acknowledge that to accurately label them as such, the profiles would need to be based exclusively on motivational variables as latent indicators and aligned with a specific conceptual model of motivation.

The variables selected as latent indicators were chosen to capture a holistic view of individuals’ career-related behaviors, motivations, and goals. These variables represent key elements of career adaptability and sustainability rather than being confined strictly to motivational constructs. By incorporating a broader range of indicators, the profiles provide a nuanced understanding of career engagement and sustainability.

3.2. Participants

The participants comprised 582 individuals from diverse backgrounds, including professionals, students, and members of sustainability-focused communities. Inclusion criteria were set as follows: participants (a) had an interest in or current involvement with sustainability-related practices or fields, and (b) were open to sharing their career aspirations and motivations. This approach ensured a representative sample to identify distinct profiles within the domain of sustainable career motivations.

3.3. Sample Size Calculation

A large and reliable sample size was also needed to ensure accurate class estimation, maximizing reliability and stability in latent class analysis. Minimum sample size requirements for LCA were determined following standards (500 subjects) required to detect medium effect sizes with an 80% power at a <0.05 significance level. In order to minimize data loss due to incomplete answers, 582 participants were enlisted. This is in keeping with previous career motivation and sustainability studies that report similar sample sizes due to the adequate model fit and interpretability.

3.4. Measures

The study utilized a combination of established validated measures and newly developed scales to assess the variables of interest. Each variable and the associated measurement approach is detailed below:

• Career Motivations: Career motivations were measured using adapted versions of validated scales to capture participants’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivations for career decision-making. These scales were chosen for their alignment with the study’s objectives and were cited appropriately within the manuscript.
• Career Goals: Career goals were assessed using a structured scale that evaluated participants’ long-term career aspirations and their alignment with sustainability principles. These measures helped the study understand how individuals set and prioritize career objectives in relation to their values and professional contexts.
• Sociodemographic Variables: Standardized questions were employed to collect sociodemographic variables, including age, gender, educational background, work experience, and industry of employment. These variables provided context for interpreting differences across groups.
• Career Sustainability Scores: Career sustainability scores were included in the analysis to evaluate the alignment between career motivations, goals, and sustainability-related outcomes. This newly developed scale was tailored to the study’s scope and captured dimensions of adaptability, resilience, and long-term engagement.

Career Sustainability scores were used to assess how career motivations and career goals align with sustainability-related outcomes. These scores provided a critical link between the theoretical frameworks and the practical implications of the study.

The newly developed sustainable careers scale was designed based on the framework proposed by [36], which defines sustainable careers through three dimensions: health, happiness, and productivity. The scale incorporates elements from validated instruments, such as [39] for career adaptability, [24] for HR practices, and [40] for well-being. For example:

-

Health: Items such as “I feel physically and mentally capable of performing my job” reflect the alignment between career demands and personal capacity.

-

Happiness: Items such as “My work aligns with my personal values and goals” emphasize work-life balance and personal development.

-

Productivity: Items like “I consistently achieve strong performance in my current role while planning for future opportunities” highlight employability and long-term viability.

Reliability and validity tests confirmed the suitability of these items, and the scale was tailored to align with the study’s focus on sustainable career pathways.

Validation of the Newly Developed Scale

For the newly developed career sustainability scale, a rigorous validation process was undertaken to ensure its reliability and suitability. This included the following:

• Reliability Testing: Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha, with all items demonstrating acceptable reliability thresholds.
• Validity Testing: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to assess the measurement model’s structure and suitability. Factor loadings indicated that the scale items were appropriately aligned with the intended dimensions of career sustainability.

Rationale for Developing New Scales

While reviewing existing validated measures, it was determined that they did not fully align with the study’s specific focus on sustainability-related career motivations and outcomes. The newly developed scale was designed to address this gap, capturing nuanced aspects of career adaptability and sustainability unique to the study’s objectives.

These details ensure transparency and provide a strong methodological foundation for interpreting the results. We believe this approach strengthens the study’s contribution to the understanding of sustainable career pathways.

3.5. Data Collection

Participants completed a voluntary online survey once ethical approval to conduct the study was secured. Before initiating the survey, informed consent was obtained from each participant. The data were collected between January and October 2024.

The survey included an exhaustive array of questions that focused on the motivations for sustainability careers and what influences these motives. Key variables included:

• Career Motivations: This section comprised items designed to measure motivations for engaging in sustainability careers, including personal values, environmental impact, career satisfaction, and societal contribution. Each item was rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree).
• Career Goals: This section included objectives (e.g., promotional goals), job roles, and place of work preferences related to sustainability that required being rated along the five-point scale. We reviewed items that measure ambition, role expectations, and sectoral preferences within sustainability careers on a five-point Likert scale.
• Demographic Variables: Demographics, including age, sex, education level, occupation, region) were examined for variation between groups. The demographic data assist in understanding the diversity of career motivations and collective aspirations across sectors.
• Latent Class Indicators: LCA was used to categorize participants according to their career motivation and aspiration items. The analysis aimed to tease out separate profiles or classes of individuals with distinct motivations for careers in sustainability. We then conducted a follow-up analysis to examine associations between these latent classes and demographic characteristics.

3.6. Summary Statistics

The sample consisted of 582 participants. The mean age of participants was 34.7 (SD = 6.3) years old, reflecting a wide range from early-career to late-career professionals across the sample. Sustainable career motivations were moderately to highly endorsed (mean = 3.42, SD = 0.56), suggesting that students continued to be interested in sustainability across different career paths.

3.7. Data Analysis

We used descriptive statistics, latent class analysis (LCA), and ANOVA to test the study hypotheses concerning sustainable career motivations by sociodemographic factors. To reduce the dropout effect, only those who answered 85% of the questions were included in the analyses. Key sociodemographic distribution and career motivations/aspirations variables were summarized as means, frequencies (percentages) with standard deviations (SD). Differences among the identified latent classes were determined using ANOVA and post hoc comparisons. We checked the variables that follow normal distribution by Levene’s Test, and whenever there were disparities in variances, we used Welch’s t-test. The Tukey test was employed for post hoc analyses to further reveal inter-group differences.

We, therefore, used latent class analysis (LCA) as the main method to uncover subgroups of individuals with common career motivations in sustainability. LCA was used to group participants into latent classes representing different career aspirations and motivations. The best fitting number of latent classes was arrived at through fit indices compared to Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). Pearson’s correlation coefficients were then computed to investigate bivariate correlations between sustainable career motivations and demographic variables as well.

LCA was selected over other unsupervised learning techniques primarily because it can reveal unmeasured heterogeneity in the sample (and thus uncover known subgroups with different motivations toward entering the sustainability labor force). Leveraging LCA’s probabilistic framework allowed for more flexibility to quantify class memberships with finer precision and provided a comparative perspective on career motivations and aspirations not possible in traditional analyses.

The reliability of the survey scales was assessed by computing Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, with a threshold criterion set at 0.70 [37]. The data were first checked on skewness, kurtosis, and normality (all values ±1.5).

Model fit of the latent class model was assessed using several criteria: (a) a significant decrease in AIC and BIC values with additional classes; (b) posterior probabilities to confirm class membership, which should be close to one for always belongs or never beliefs respectively; and (c) entropy value above 0.80 suggesting high classification accuracy.

Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to reduce selection bias and potential endogeneity between sustainable career motivations and career aspirations. Based on covariates, such as age, education level, occupation type (e.g., healthcare profession), years of work experience post-high school graduation in this or a similar field [41], and marital status. Logistic regression was used to estimate the probability of high-motivation treatment group membership for each participant, with Nearest-Neighbor Matching and a caliper equal to 0.05 [18]. Standardized mean differences and t-tests were used to additionally check covariate balance. The paired samples t-test was used to examine the career aspirations of matched groups.

Harman’s single-factor was used to test for common method bias due to self-reported measures. From the questionnaire, all items in each of the four career motivation and aspiration scales were used as input to an unrotated principal component factor analysis. Each single-factor test had an initial exploration of the variance by one factor and highlighted significant method bias.

4. Results

In this study, data were collected from 582 individuals, with a near-even age distribution across different stages of professional life. Participants aged 20–25 years old comprised 25.3% of the sample, followed closely by those aged 26–35 years old (25.1%), 36–40 years old (25.8%), and those over 41 years old (23.9%). Gender distribution was fairly balanced, with men making up 52.2% and women 47.8%.

In terms of educational background, the majority of participants held a Bachelor’s degree (60%), followed by those with a Master’s degree (18.9%), an Associate degree (13.2%), and a Doctorate (7.9%). Work experience varied, with 56.2% of respondents having over 10 years of experience, while 15.5% had less than 1 year, 15.6% had between 1 and 5 years, and 12.7% had between 5 and 10 years.

Participants were drawn from various sectors, with education being the most represented at 26.6%, followed by healthcare (24.9%), banking (24.7%), and tourism (23.7%). Marital status was nearly even, with single participants accounting for 50.7% and married participants 49.3%. Regarding family size, 31.3% of respondents had no children, 25.3% had one child, 22.5% had two children, 16.0% had three children, and 5.0% had four or more children.

Income levels were diverse, with the most commonly reported range being 25,001–33,000 (33.7%), followed by 17,001–25,000 (30.1%), the minimum wage (16.5%), 33,001–41,000 (12.9%), and over 41,000 (6.9%). The majority of respondents worked in the private sector (80.8%), with smaller portions in mixed ownership (10.3%) and foreign ownership (8.9%).

This demographic and professional overview, as presented in

Table 1. Demographic and work characteristics of the participants.

Characteristics	Number (N)	Percentage (%)
Age Distribution
20–25 years old	147	25.3
26–35 years old	146	25.1
36–40 years olf	150	25.8
41+ years olf	139	23.9
Gender Distribution
Male	304	52.2
Female	278	47.8
Educational Background
Bachelor’s Degree	349	60.0
Master’s Degree	110	18.9
Associate Degree	77	13.2
Doctorate	46	7.9
Work Experience (Years)
Less than 1 year	90	15.5
1–5 years	91	15.6
5–10 years	74	12.7
More than 10 years	327	56.2
Industry Sector
Education	155	26.6
Healthcare	145	24.9
Banking	144	24.7
Tourism	138	23.7
Marital Status
Single	295	50.7
Married	287	49.3
Number of Children
0	182	31.3
1	147	25.3
2	131	22.5
3	93	16.0
4 or more	29	5.0
Income Level
25,001–33,000	196	33.7
17,001–25,000	175	30.1
Minimum Wage	96	16.5
33,001–41,000	75	12.9
Over 41,000	40	6.9
Type of Ownership of Workplace
Private sector	470	80.8
Mixed ownership	60	10.3
Foreign ownership	52	8.9

, provides a comprehensive profile of the study’s participants, allowing for a nuanced analysis of sustainability-related career motivations across various backgrounds.

The latent class analysis (LCA) identified four distinct classes based on scores across four variables: Sustainable Career (S1 to S12), Career Agility (K1 to K14), Job Proficiency (J1 to J19), and Leader–Member Interaction (L1 to L9).

Table 2. Latent class results.

Class	S1	S2	S3	S4	S5	S6	S7	S8	S9	S10	S11	S12	K1	K2	K3	K4	K5	K6	K7	K8	K9	K10	K11	K12	K13	K14
0	2.71	3.13	2.96	3.05	2.54	3.16	2.98	3.13	3.03	2.61	2.71	2.28	2.06	2.47	2.25	2.2	2.37	2.28	2.54	2.76	2.66	2.42	2.47	2.37	2.67	2.44
1	1.51	1.83	1.84	1.84	1.7	1.89	1.91	1.87	2.01	2.02	1.94	1.91	1.49	1.62	1.65	1.7	1.56	1.64	1.75	1.98	1.96	1.92	1.84	1.94	2.06	1.89
2	4.31	3.91	3.91	3.88	3.86	3.91	3.9	3.92	3.95	3.67	3.73	3.75	3.99	3.97	3.98	4.01	4.08	3.85	3.79	3.54	3.62	3.55	3.94	3.62	3.68	3.69
3	3.38	3.52	3.38	3.49	3.24	3.56	3.34	3.28	3.61	3.26	3.16	3.05	3.9	3.72	3.67	3.85	3.93	3.78	3.55	3.36	3.24	3.44	3.66	3.57	3.35	3.57
J1	J2	J3	J4	J5	J6	J7	J8	J9	J10	J11	J12	J13	J14	J15	J16	J17	J18	J19	L1	L2	L3	L4	L5	L6	L7	L8	L9
3.93	3.72	3.67	3.84	3.94	3.83	3.59	3.83	3.54	3.59	3.33	3.47	3.93	3.62	3.64	3.55	3.66	3.67	3.44	2.98	3.08	2.91	3.3	3.05	3.11	3.18	3.23	3.08
1.63	1.84	1.7	1.91	1.86	1.81	1.92	2.59	2.6	2.54	2.88	2.59	2.49	2.65	2.39	2.39	2.62	2.39	2.26	3.02	2.69	2.41	3.06	2.79	2.18	2.96	2.78	2.43
4.17	3.77	3.8	3.77	3.8	3.85	3.74	3.95	3.62	3.68	3.71	3.58	4.03	3.69	3.73	3.7	3.62	3.66	3.75	3.55	3.53	3.65	3.71	3.58	3.96	3.41	3.81	3.61
2.3	2.43	2.41	2.34	2.44	2.29	2.37	2.77	2.69	2.65	2.59	2.61	2.65	2.76	2.57	2.62	2.63	2.57	2.6	3.36	3.35	3.37	3.59	3.32	3.53	3.29	3.59	3.28

summarizes the scores for each class.

1.

Class 1: Moderate Sustainable Career, Low Career Agility

○

Class 1 participants exhibited moderate scores in Sustainable Career (S1 = 2.71, S2 = 3.13) but relatively low scores in Career Agility (K1 = 2.47, K2 = 2.25). Job Proficiency scores (J1 = 3.93, J2 = 3.72) were stable, suggesting consistent job skills despite low career adaptability. Leader–Member Interaction scores were also moderate (L1 = 2.98, L2 = 3.08), indicating fair workplace relationships.

2.

Class 2: Low Engagement Across All Variables

○

This class displayed the lowest scores across all measures, indicating limited engagement in sustainable career practices (S1 = 1.51), low career agility (K1 = 1.62), and low job proficiency (J1 = 1.63). With lower Leader–Member Interaction scores (L1 = 3.02, L2 = 2.69), this group likely struggles with workplace relationships, which might impact career satisfaction and growth.

3.

Class 3: High Sustainable Career, High Career Agility

○

Class 3 participants reported high scores in both Sustainable Career (S1 = 4.31, S2 = 3.91) and Career Agility (K1 = 3.97, K2 = 3.98). They also had strong Job Proficiency scores (J1 = 4.17), indicating well-developed job skills, and their Leader–Member Interaction scores (L1 = 3.55, L2 = 3.53) were positive, suggesting solid workplace relationships.

4.

Class 4: Moderate Across All Variables

○

This group scored moderately across all indicators, with Sustainable Career scores around 3.38 (S1) and 3.52 (S2), moderate Career Agility scores (K1 = 3.72), and Job Proficiency scores in the mid-range (J1 = 2.3, J2 = 2.43). Their Leader–Member Interaction scores (L1 = 3.36, L2 = 3.35) were stable, reflecting balanced but non-exceptional workplace relationships.

The LCA results support the hypothesis that individuals exhibit significant variation in their engagement across career-related dimensions. For instance, Class 3’s high scores in both Sustainable Career and Career Agility align with Career Construction Theory (CCT), which posits that individuals actively shape their careers based on personal values and aspirations. This high alignment with sustainability likely fosters adaptability and skill proficiency, as individuals in this class construct their careers around meaningful sustainability-focused goals. On the other hand, Class 2’s lower scores across all variables suggest challenges in adaptability and job performance, which may reflect lower self-efficacy in sustainable career paths. This finding corresponds with Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), as lower engagement in sustainability might limit the sense of capability and resilience in navigating career challenges. It also indicates a potential need for targeted interventions to improve workplace engagement and resilience for individuals who may lack support in sustainable practices. Furthermore, the findings reinforce Sustainable Career Theory (SCT) by illustrating that individuals with a strong alignment to sustainable values, such as those in Class 3, demonstrate greater career adaptability and satisfaction. The variations across classes suggest that tailored approaches to support career agility and sustainable practices can optimize both career satisfaction and resilience, enhancing career longevity and adaptability within sustainability-focused pathways (Figure 1).

4.1. Post Hoc Test Results

The results of the post hoc test revealed significant differences across latent classes for various indicators, offering insights into the nuanced effects of sustainable career practices, career agility, job proficiency, and leader–member interaction on psychological outcomes. The following findings highlight the specific class differences in these areas (

Table 3. Results of the post hoc test.

	F-Value	p-Value
S1	2.978836	0.030989
S2	0.638532	0.59043
S3	3.929973	0.008558
S4	1.356212	0.255281
S5	2.504367	0.058305
S6	0.836231	0.474311
S7	1.198996	0.309409
S8	0.221999	0.881126
S9	1.386042	0.24604
S10	2.900828	0.034402
S11	1.970365	0.117282
S12	3.450718	0.01641
K1	0.327698	0.805339
K2	0.644661	0.58655
K3	2.766005	0.04119
K4	2.256282	0.08083
K5	4.294554	0.005202
K6	2.468578	0.061129
K7	0.45794	0.711787
K8	1.341051	0.260098
K9	0.037652	0.990227
K10	0.157666	0.924736
K11	2.702566	0.044822
K12	3.987814	0.007909
K13	1.079737	0.357083
K14	0.668407	0.571684
J1	1.157571	0.325289
J2	1.173628	0.319049
J3	0.744443	0.525878
J4	0.467922	0.704767
J5	0.080393	0.970655
J6	0.882999	0.449616
J7	0.833815	0.475616
J8	0.609842	0.608814
J9	0.718127	0.541418
J10	0.905307	0.438209
J11	0.413185	0.743596
J12	0.374603	0.771359
J13	0.580501	0.627992
J14	2.57964	0.052773
J15	0.187384	0.904991
J16	0.924491	0.42859
J17	0.2446	0.865187
J18	0.715393	0.543051
J19	0.808612	0.489395
L1	1.96999	0.117339
L2	1.693154	0.167339
L3	2.712507	0.044233
L4	3.535643	0.014627
L5	0.867892	0.457477
L6	1.042729	0.373129
L7	1.550759	0.200335
L8	2.146001	0.093365
L9	0.61897	0.602925

).

1.

Sustainable Career (S1, S3, S10, S12)

○

For S1, a significant difference was observed between Class 1 and Class 2 (p < 0.05), indicating that participants in Class 1, with higher engagement in sustainable career practices, reported significantly greater satisfaction in sustainability-related activities compared to Class 2. This result aligns with Sustainable Career Theory (SCT), suggesting that integrating sustainable values into career paths can enhance career satisfaction and continuity. Additionally, Career Construction Theory (CCT) supports this outcome by positing that individuals shape their careers around meaningful activities and values, such as sustainability, which provide intrinsic satisfaction and a sense of purpose.

○

S3 also showed a significant difference between Class 2 and Class 3 (p < 0.05), emphasizing that Class 3 participants, who scored higher in sustainability engagement, experienced greater satisfaction, potentially due to the psychological benefits associated with contributing to sustainability.

○

For S10 and S12, significant differences between Class 3 and Class 4 (p < 0.05) highlight that Class 3, with a strong alignment toward sustainable career goals, experiences more satisfaction in sustainable practices. This supports the idea that sustainability engagement can provide intrinsic rewards, boosting career satisfaction.

2.

Career Agility (K3, K5, K11, K12)

○

Post hoc tests for K3 revealed significant differences between Class 1 and Class 3 (p < 0.05), indicating that Class 3 participants demonstrated greater agility in adapting to career changes. This finding supports the concept that engagement in sustainability correlates with increased adaptability and resilience in the workplace.

○

K5 showed significant differences between Class 2 and Class 4 (p < 0.05), with Class 4 participants exhibiting higher career agility. This suggests that moderate levels of sustainable engagement can positively influence career flexibility and responsiveness.

○

For K11 and K12, significant differences were noted between Class 1 and Class 2 (p < 0.05), with Class 1 participants demonstrating greater career agility. This outcome can be understood through Sustainable Career Theory (SCT), as a strong alignment with sustainable goals fosters career adaptability, supporting long-term career resilience and flexibility. Additionally, Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) highlights that self-efficacy and positive outcome expectations related to sustainability strengthen individuals’ adaptability and readiness to navigate career transitions, suggesting that high engagement in sustainable practices enhances career agility.

3.

Leader–Member Interaction (L3, L4)

○

Significant differences were found in L3 between Class 2 and Class 3 (p < 0.05), with Class 3 reporting more positive leader–member interactions. This outcome suggests that those with higher sustainability engagement may experience better workplace relationships, which can serve as an important psychological resource.

○

For L4, significant differences were also observed between Class 1 and Class 4 (p < 0.05), indicating that higher engagement in sustainability enhances leader–member interaction, supporting the theory that pro-environmental behaviors foster a positive work environment and collaborative relationships.

These are post hoc results that highlight the effects of sustainable work practices upon different career development forms as well as workplace behaviors. This may indicate that job satisfaction, adaptability, and leader–member interaction also increased, which suggests individuals are more intrinsically motivated/psychologically supported when engaging in sustainable career behaviors. This supports the Career Construction Theory, where individuals derive meaning from their careers by developing an association between personal values and purpose (sustainability practice as a career identity). Moreover, this study is consistent with certain aspects of Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), which states that self-efficacy and outcome expectations are the determinants in facilitating the career adaptability motivational process. Individuals involved in sustainability practices can act around pro-environmental beliefs; hence, it may support a strong sense of efficacy and personal values/environmentally aware goals to assist one through inevitable transitions within their career. Moreover, the results also provide additional evidence for the Sustainable Career Theory, which considers career persistence as well as flexibility and meaningfulness. It appears that continuing career satisfaction develops through sustainability engagement along with sustaining careers by coordinating professional goals to be consonant with personal and ecological values. Overall, the findings provide evidence of career agility and social exchange benefits of sustainable work practices but indicate in direct support that they affect the most manifest variables. Even job proficiency was different between establishments, pointing out higher differences in performance constructs related to sustainability. This definition suggests the promise with which sustainable engagement is aspirational but can work in a nuanced, fickle manner depending on individual roles and sectors, thereby charting different structural supports required engagements with sustainability across multiple points of employment.

4.2. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) Analysis

Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for potential selection bias of an individual in high vs. low sustainable career practices engagement. PSM matches similar treatment (high engagement) and no treatment control groups directly based on career satisfaction and resilience outcomes related to sustainable career engagement. It also ensures that any differences in satisfaction or resilience can be more causally attributed to careers related to sustainability rather than other potential confounders (e.g., demographics, job characteristics).

The PSM analysis revealed a significant positive association between high engagement in sustainable career practices and both career satisfaction and resilience:

1.

Career satisfaction:

○

Treatment group mean: ≈3.92

○

Control group mean: ≈3.45

○

p-Value: 0.03 (significant)

○

Cohen’s d: 0.47 (medium effect size)

The treatment group, representing individuals with high engagement in sustainable career practices, reported a higher average career satisfaction score (3.92) compared to the control group (3.45). The significant p-value (0.03) confirms that this difference is statistically meaningful. With a Cohen’s d of 0.47, the effect size indicates a medium impact, suggesting that engagement in sustainable practices contributes to a moderate increase in career satisfaction.

2.

Resilience:

○

Treatment group mean: ≈3.58

○

Control group mean: ≈3.22

○

p-Value: 0.02 (significant)

○

Cohen’s d: 0.43 (medium effect size)

Similarly, individuals in the treatment group scored higher on resilience (3.58) than those in the control group (3.22). The p-value of 0.02 confirms this difference as statistically significant, and the medium effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.43) implies that high engagement in sustainable practices is moderately associated with greater resilience. These findings suggest that fostering sustainable career practices may enhance both career satisfaction and resilience, providing intrinsic benefits that support long-term career commitment. The medium effect sizes for both outcomes imply that while sustainable engagement has a meaningful impact, other contextual or individual factors may also contribute to career satisfaction and resilience.

5. Discussion

Using person-centered approaches, this study sought to identify latent classes of individuals in terms of their engagement with and motivational profiles regarding sustainable career practices, exploring how these classes related to pathways toward sustainability. The findings are important in understanding the levels of motivation and engagement with sustainable careers, which underscores how different motivational configurations can shape career development and adaptability.

The significant differences observed among latent classes suggest that individuals’ motivations for pursuing sustainable careers are multi-faceted and influenced by personal values, professional goals, and external factors.

5.1. Career Construction and Personal Narratives

According to Career Construction Theory, individuals engage in career meaning-making that aligns their prestige interests and experiences through narrative construction [1]. The results indicate that individuals in Class 1, who scored highest in sustainable career practices, likely view sustainability as an essential strategic component of their professional identity. Their strong alignment with sustainability provided a sense of purpose, deepened their career goals, and demonstrated that motivations in career construction could be deeply connected to sustainability. This aligns with prior research suggesting that sustainability professionals often find meaning and fulfillment from their environmental contributions, potentially enhancing job satisfaction and reducing turnover intentions [19]. Roles aligned with sustainability enable individuals to construct meaningful narratives, fulfill broader life themes, and increase career resilience, consistent with Career Construction Theory [42].

5.2. Social Cognitive Factors and Career Adaptability

Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) posits that self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and external supports are crucial in career decision-making, especially for adaptability and resilience [2]. Results from relational analysis indicate that career agility varies by latent class, with individuals who express strong confidence in sustainability practices demonstrating higher adaptability. This adaptability likely stems from self-efficacy, developed through active involvement in sustainability efforts. For example, Class 3 members with high career agility illustrate how self-efficacy in sustainability roles supports flexibility in career transitions. This finding aligns with previous research, suggesting that enhanced self-efficacy in sustainability contexts fosters adaptability and resilience [36]. Conversely, individuals in Class 2 with lower motivation for sustainability may lack the self-efficacy or environmental support required to develop career agility, diminishing their likelihood of committing to long-term sustainability roles. These findings underscore SCCT’s relevance, highlighting how a supportive environment fosters career flexibility and commitment to sustainability [43].

5.3. Sustainable Career Engagement and Longevity

Sustainable Career Theory views careers as meaningful journeys that emphasize personal growth and adaptability over time [20]. The balanced engagement observed in Class 4 aligns with the flexibility and sustainability principles valued by top management teams (TMT), illustrating that even moderate sustainability engagement can support job satisfaction and longevity, especially in high-stress environments. These findings are consistent with prior literature, indicating that moderate sustainability engagement can buffer against workplace stressors, promoting resilience and long-term satisfaction—especially in high-strain sectors like eldercare [44]. Overall, these findings support the Sustainable Career Theory, suggesting that integrating sustainability practices into one’s career can provide resources that align personal values with work, aiding in the management of work-family conflicts and fostering sustained career engagement [41].

The findings of this study demonstrate how the new Sustainable Careers scale reflects the framework by [36]. The dimension of health was well-represented, with participants in higher latent classes reporting greater alignment between their physical and mental capacities and their professional roles. Happiness was also captured effectively, as individuals who scored higher on sustainability dimensions expressed strong alignment with their personal values and career goals. Finally, the dimension of productivity was evident in the high engagement and adaptability demonstrated by participants in Class 3, who consistently achieved career milestones while maintaining long-term career planning. However, it is worth noting that some aspects of the framework, such as dynamic transitions between dimensions over time, may not be fully captured by the cross-sectional design of this study. Future iterations of the scale could include longitudinal components to better reflect the dynamic nature of sustainable careers.

5.4. Motivational Profiles as Pathways to Sustainable Careers

The results of this study support H1, showing that individuals can indeed be categorized into distinct latent classes based on their motivations and behaviors related to sustainable careers. Higher engagement classes demonstrated a stronger predisposition and greater motivation toward career adaptability and sustainability-oriented learning. This suggests that individuals following sustainable career pathways are more likely to exhibit adaptive and proactive behaviors, aligning their career growth with their environmental values. Such pathways emphasize the importance of early professional development focused on sustainability, as intrinsic motivations for sustainability contribute to long-term career resilience and satisfaction. This aligns with previous research indicating that individuals with a strong intrinsic motivation toward sustainability experience higher career satisfaction and adaptability, reinforcing the role of sustainable engagement as a foundational element for resilience over time. By recognizing these motivational profiles, organizations can foster employee satisfaction and commitment in sustainability roles, integrating sustainability-focused growth into career pathways to build a workforce aligned with environmental goals.

5.5. Partial Confirmation of Motivational Influence on Career Development

The findings also partially support H2, as higher engagement in sustainable practices is associated with improved career adaptability and motivation. However, Class 4 suggests that optimal engagement levels can vary based on extrinsic factors, such as job security and environmental pressures, which may impact stability in sustainable careers. Career Construction Theory (CCT) and Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) provide a basis for understanding these dynamics; individuals who integrate sustainability into their career narratives demonstrate greater adaptability and a stronger connection to career goals. Sustainable Career Theory (SCT) also underscores that sustainable career engagement facilitates continuity, adaptability, and meaning, thereby supporting enduring career development. In particular, Class 4 highlights that career adaptability in sustainability may be influenced by sector-specific challenges, indicating that extrinsic factors—such as resource availability and organizational support—play a role alongside intrinsic motivations. This reinforces the view that career satisfaction and adaptability are shaped by both internal motivations and external, organizational factors, supporting the hypothesis that sustainable engagement fosters a dynamic and resilient career trajectory.

5.6. Sector-Specific Considerations

The sectoral data from this study suggest that high-stress sectors, such as healthcare and education, may negatively impact sustainability engagement, supporting the hypothesis of lower motivation among Class 2 participants, who are predominantly from these fields. In contrast to low-demand industries, high-stress sectors face elevated burnout risks, particularly in roles lacking organizational support or resources [45]. Integrating sustainability into these professions can provide meaningful engagement and bolster resilience, offering a potential buffer against burnout. This finding aligns with previous research, which highlights the role of sustainability in high-stress sectors like human rights, where it has been shown to reduce burnout and promote long-term career satisfaction [19].

5.7. Integration of Theoretical Frameworks

The discussion of this study’s findings highlights the significant role of theoretical frameworks in understanding motivational diversity in sustainable career pathways. To provide a comprehensive interpretation of the results, we explicitly linked each theoretical framework to the study’s findings.

Career Construction Theory emphasizes how individuals construct meaningful career narratives by aligning personal values with their professional goals. The latent motivational profiles identified in this study reflect this process of narrative construction. For instance, participants with high sustainability engagement demonstrated a strong alignment between their personal values and their career paths, suggesting that intrinsic motivation plays a key role in shaping sustainable career trajectories. This narrative-driven alignment underscores the importance of purpose and meaning in career adaptability and resilience, as theorized by Career Construction Theory.

Social Cognitive Career Theory underscores the interplay between self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and environmental supports in shaping career behaviors. The findings of this study revealed that individuals with high adaptability and positive leader–member interactions reported greater career satisfaction and engagement. These results align with the framework’s emphasis on the role of self-efficacy and external reinforcements in promoting resilience and adaptability. For example, participants who experienced supportive leader–member exchanges were better equipped to navigate career challenges, reinforcing the critical role of workplace environments in fostering sustainable career engagement.

Sustainable Career Theory highlights the dynamic and adaptable nature of career pathways, emphasizing continuity and alignment with personal goals over the career lifespan. The identification of distinct latent motivational profiles in this study aligns with the theory’s premise that sustainability in careers requires a balance between individual and organizational objectives. Participants from high-stress industries, such as healthcare and education, demonstrated how sector-specific challenges influence the interaction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors. These findings underscore the importance of tailoring career interventions to sector-specific needs while maintaining a focus on long-term sustainability and adaptability.

By explicitly linking these theoretical frameworks to the study’s findings, we have demonstrated how the integration of Career Construction Theory, Social Cognitive Career Theory, and Sustainable Career Theory provides a nuanced understanding of motivational diversity in sustainable career pathways. This comprehensive perspective not only advances theoretical insights but also informs practical strategies for fostering resilience and adaptability in diverse organizational contexts.

We incorporated recent studies that focus on sustainable career transitions in high-demand sectors. For instance, in healthcare, resilience training programs such as the model developed by [46] have demonstrated positive impacts on personal and professional resilience, reducing burnout and improving coping mechanisms among healthcare professionals. In education, professional development models described by [47] emphasize teacher adaptability through training that supports adaptive teaching practices and instructional purpose. In emergency services, ref. [48] developed and validated a career resilience instrument specifically for CDC emergency responders, highlighting cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions critical for managing high-stress public health emergencies. By integrating these insights, we aim to enhance the study’s relevance and practical implications, particularly for industries facing elevated levels of occupational stress.

5.8. Implications for Sustainable Career Development Programs

The unique motivational profiles identified in this study suggest a strong potential for sector-specific interventions focused on sustainability career development. Providing targeted resources and support could promote sustained engagement, even in high-stress environments. While exploring these programs in depth is beyond this study’s scope, existing literature supports the notion that embedding sustainability within organizational culture enhances adaptability and engagement, positively impacting employee retention and work outcomes [21]. By implementing sector-specific strategies, organizations can address the unique needs of sustainability-focused roles, fostering resilient and long-lasting careers for professionals dedicated to sustainability.

In the healthcare sector [49], the findings suggest that individuals in high-stress environments benefit from resilience-building programs and leader–member interactions that foster trust and support. For example, interventions could include mentorship programs that align with the intrinsic motivations of healthcare professionals or job-crafting initiatives that enable autonomy and adaptability in high-pressure roles. In the education sector, given the importance of career agility and job proficiency in this field, professional development workshops could be designed to enhance teachers’ adaptability to changing educational demands, while collaborative leader–member exchanges could help foster a supportive environment for navigating these challenges.

6. Conclusions

This study explored motivational profiles within sustainable career pathways using latent class analysis, identifying distinct patterns in sustainable career engagement, career agility, job proficiency, and leader–member interaction. The results highlighted that individuals exhibit varying levels of motivation toward sustainability, with some latent classes showing higher career adaptability and alignment with sustainable values. These findings contribute to a nuanced understanding of sustainable career engagement, suggesting that intrinsic motivations and adaptive career behaviors support a long-term commitment to sustainability-focused careers.

6.1. Theoretical Implications

This study advances career development theory by reinforcing the theoretical foundations of sustainable career motivation and navigable career pathways, offering several interconnected contributions across key frameworks. Firstly, it extends Career Construction Theory (CCT) by illustrating that individuals construct viable careers around values grounded in environmental and societal stewardship, embedding sustainability within their career narratives. This alignment gives individuals a sense of purpose and belonging, integrating personal goals within broader career structures [1]. Additionally, this is consistent with Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), which posits that the more individuals engage in their sustainable careers, the higher their levels of “career agility”—or the adaptability and flexibility regarding their work identity. The self-efficacy model in sustainability within the SCCT framework tests adaptability concerning reemployment and quality of work adjustments [2]. This finding supports the Sustainable Career Theory, which posits that individuals motivated by sustainability are more likely to experience continuous, adaptable careers with higher levels of satisfaction. This reflects Sustainable Career Theory’s emphasis on meaningful, career-long practices that favor the integration of sustainability within roles as part of a sustainable approach to career development [20]. Collectively, these theoretical contributions provide a nuanced understanding of how motivations rooted in sustainability promote resilience and alignment with personal values, reinforcing sustainable practices within organizational frameworks.

6.2. Practical Contributions

The findings of this study have several practical implications, particularly when viewed through the lens of industry-specific contexts. By tailoring interventions to the unique challenges and opportunities within each sector, organizations can effectively foster sustainable career pathways, enhance employee well-being, and strengthen workforce resilience.

In the education sector, which represents 26.6% of the study’s participants, there is a strong emphasis on lifelong learning and continuous professional development. These characteristics align closely with the motivational profiles that highlight career adaptability and agility. Interventions in this sector should prioritize professional development programs that focus on adaptive teaching methods and curriculum design, helping educators navigate evolving educational demands. Collaborative learning platforms can also play a significant role by creating opportunities for peer-to-peer knowledge exchange and mentorship, which can build career resilience. Additionally, encouraging job crafting among teachers to personalize their roles can enhance intrinsic motivation and align their career trajectories with sustainability goals.

In the healthcare sector, comprising 24.9% of participants, professionals often operate in high-stress environments. The latent class findings suggest that resilience-building and supportive leader–member interactions are critical for sustainable career engagement in this field. Practical interventions in healthcare should include resilience-building programs, such as mindfulness training, stress management workshops, and peer support networks, to mitigate burnout. Structured mentorship programs, where experienced professionals provide guidance and emotional support to newer staff, can also enhance resilience and job satisfaction. Furthermore, fostering job crafting opportunities by allowing healthcare professionals to design workflows that better align with their strengths and career motivations can be highly beneficial.

The banking sector, which accounts for 24.7% of participants, faces frequent regulatory changes and technological advancements. These dynamics necessitate agility and adaptability in career development. Organizations in this sector can benefit from offering agility training programs that focus on skills such as change management, adaptability to regulatory updates, and digital proficiency. Leadership development initiatives can create opportunities for employees to strengthen their leader–member interactions, fostering an environment of trust and collaboration. Additionally, providing access to certifications and courses in emerging areas such as fintech and risk management can enhance job proficiency and career sustainability.

The tourism sector, with 23.7% representation, is a dynamic and sustainability-focused industry that benefits from flexibility and customer engagement. Practical applications in this sector could include implementing flexible work arrangements and cross-training opportunities to enhance adaptability. Encouraging employees to adopt practices that align with sustainability goals, such as eco-tourism and cultural preservation, can contribute to both organizational and personal satisfaction. Moreover, training employees to incorporate sustainability principles into their interactions with customers can enhance job satisfaction while supporting the organization’s sustainability mission.

Across all sectors, organizations can benefit from applying insights from the study’s latent classes to develop tailored interventions that align with employees’ motivational profiles. Personalized career pathways that align individual values with organizational goals can be designed using these profiles. Supportive leadership practices that enhance leader–member exchanges can provide employees with the trust, autonomy, and resources they need to thrive. Additionally, embedding sustainability principles into organizational policies and training programs can foster a shared commitment to long-term career and environmental goals.

By incorporating these industry-specific and cross-sector strategies, organizations can promote sustainable career pathways, improve employee satisfaction, and support resilience in an ever-changing work environment.

This study contributes to the broader discourse on sustainability by focusing on sustainable careers, which align with the principles of long-term adaptability, resilience, and well-being at both individual and organizational levels. Sustainable careers are essential for fostering a workforce that is both engaged and capable of contributing to organizational and societal goals over time. Specifically, the paper addresses sustainability by identifying motivational profiles that influence individuals’ commitment to career pathways that align with their values and long-term goals. It also emphasizes career adaptability as a mechanism for maintaining satisfaction and productivity in dynamic work environments. These insights have practical implications for creating supportive workplace strategies, such as resilience-building programs and leader–member exchanges, which are crucial for achieving sustainable human resource practices. Furthermore, the study’s focus on industries like healthcare and education highlights the importance of addressing sector-specific challenges to promote sustainable workforce engagement, a key component of achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs) related to good health, well-being, and quality education. By integrating theoretical frameworks such as Career Construction Theory and Sustainable Career Theory, this paper provides a nuanced understanding of how individual and organizational efforts can converge to promote sustainable career development, contributing to the broader sustainability agenda.

6.3. Limitations and Future Research

While this study provides valuable insights, several limitations must be acknowledged. The cross-sectional design restricts causal inferences, underscoring the need for longitudinal research to observe changes in sustainable career motivation over time and across different career stages. Additionally, the sample predominantly includes professionals from the education and healthcare sectors, which may limit the generalizability of findings. While the inclusion of these two high-demand sectors provides valuable insights into career adaptability and sustainability within high-stress environments, future studies should aim to incorporate participants from a broader range of industries, such as manufacturing, technology, and creative fields. This would enhance the applicability of the findings across diverse work environments and provide a more comprehensive understanding of motivational profiles in varying professional contexts. The reliance on self-report measures introduces the potential for response biases; therefore, future research would benefit from integrating third-party evaluations or objective indicators to improve data accuracy. Moreover, this study did not consider variables such as personality traits, coping mechanisms, and organizational support structures, which are critical for providing a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable career engagement. Future research could build upon the foundation of this study by incorporating these variables to gain deeper insights. For example, exploring the interplay between personality traits and coping mechanisms could elucidate individual differences in career adaptability, while examining organizational support structures could reveal the influence of workplace environments on career sustainability. Including these factors would offer a more nuanced perspective on the dynamics of sustainable career pathways. Understanding the specific motivations and barriers individuals face in pursuing sustainable career pathways is another critical avenue for future research. While this study identified latent motivational profiles, further investigation is needed to explore how these motivations differ across various professional groups and how barriers intersect with personal values and organizational factors. Qualitative insights or longitudinal analyses could provide a more granular understanding of these dynamics, supporting the development of targeted interventions that foster career sustainability across diverse contexts. Exploring these areas would not only expand the scope of sustainable career research but also contribute to creating tailored strategies for overcoming barriers and enhancing motivation in sustainable career pathways. Exploring sustainable career motivations across diverse cultural and geographic contexts is another essential avenue for future studies. Longitudinal designs could provide insights into how sustainable career motivations evolve over time, particularly in response to life events, career transitions, or changing workplace environments. Furthermore, examining targeted interventions to foster sustainable career pathways may benefit employees in high-demand fields, addressing both personal and organizational challenges. Such research could also contribute to promoting environmental responsibility within organizations, aligning individual career sustainability with broader sustainability goals.