CareerSteer – careers test for career choice www.careersteer.org
Cole Davis. April, 1995. LCD3 Birkbeck College. Assess the
contribution that career development programmes might make in
increasing employees' responsibility for their own development.
It will be argued here that assessments in this area within
our current state of knowledge must be of an a priori nature; in
addition to methodological problems, the forces creating many
problems for employees are so volatile as to make solutions
rather tentative. An additional problem is to reconcile in-house
career development programmes promoting autonomy with the
employer's perceived interests. It will be seen that this
crucial issue has led to a common classification along an
employer- and employee-focussed continuum; such a paradigm may
be seen to be less useful than a developmental model.
Russell (1991) defines career development interventions "as
any efforts by organizations to assist individuals in managing
their careers and to help organizations meet their goals (e.g.
improved efficiency, staffing)." Kidd (in press) distinguishes
between a focus on organisational needs and on employees'
concerns. The former includes fast-track programmes,
developmental assessment centres, and the provision of
information about career ladders and paths, the latter being
primarily founded on assessment of potential abilities and
competencies. The latter includes career planning workshops,
self-study materials and individual career counselling.
Iles and Mabey (1993) point out that whilst guidelines have
often been drawn up for career development programmes, less
effort has been put into evaluations and surveys of user
responses. Russell (1991) and Morgan et al. (1979) make similar
comments, the latter reporting that those organisations that did
evaluate their programmes used reaction measures or global
organizational measures (e.g., profit, turnover), with few
controls imposed. London and Stumpf (1982) also reported lack of
control groups, overreliance on self-report measures, and few
longitudinal studies.
Hanson's comment (1982) that "participants perception of being
'in control' of career actions improved, but not their
involvement in their jobs" is reflected in other research. The
problems of self-report have been reported in surveys of stress
research (c.f. Frese and Zapf, 1988; Kasl, 1986) and studies of
the limits of self-perception (Nisbett and Wilson, 1977). So
although Kidd (in press) supports a phenomenological approach,
one must query the use of participants' reactions only.
Iles and Mabey (1993) indicate considerable methodological
shortcomings in research undertaken with 'hard data', although
they do cite a U.S. naval study (Stump, 1986) which showed
significant increases in job performance using follow-up data. A
problem with one isolated longitudinal study is that domain-
specific effects cannot be ruled out.
Pringle and Gold (1989) questioned the value of such
activities in an era of rapid change. There is a possibility
that research data may be very much affected by the economic
forces of the times and also that the apparently wise careers
advice of today may be utterly at odds with employees' needs in
the very near future.
It can thus be seen that it is hard to evaluate career
development programmes in a scientific way. Even an a priori
assessment can only be tentative, given the range of likely
employee reactions in different circumstances and their notions
of responsibility. Gutteridge (1986) claims that
"not all employees will enthusiastically endorse career
development programs: Some will perceive that career
development is primarily or exclusively an organizational
responsibility, while others will conclude that their career
progress is simply a matter of luck or of being in the right
place at the right time. Still others will argue that there
is no sense in career planning, since one cannot foresee the
future. Finally, some individuals will find the self-
assessment process inherent in career planning threatening
and/or may be reluctant to make the changes required to
implement a career strategy."
It is the task of the assessment, then, to ask which forms of
intervention are most likely to appeal to individuals, as well as
which tend more towards 'increasing employees' responsibility for
their own development.' Both Hall (1986a) and Kidd (in press)
classify programmes according to organisational and employee
focus. Hall describes a spectrum of career development
activities, running from 'employee-centred' career planning
(self-directed workbooks and tape cassettes), through 'mutual
focus' manager-employee planning (career coaching and counselling
sessions), to 'organization centred' career management (e.g.
succession planning). A polarisation of effects is described:
the employee-centred end of the continuum includes high influence
of the individual, high information provided to the individual,
low information provided to the organisation, and low influence
of the organisation.
An implied assumption is that the greater the focus on the
employee, the more likely it is that the programme will increase
employee responsibility for career development. This seems
reasonable in the cases of succession planning and fast track
promotion systems (the latter being seen as unfair even by those
on the fast track); the interests of the employer are paramount,
independence probably only emerging from the alienation of the
unchosen. "I finally realized that they (management) weren't
going to do anything for me, so I'd have to make something happen
for myself." (Hall, 1986b)
Development centres, however - based on the success of
assessment centres as accurate predictors of managerial potential
- may be seen in a different light. Although run by
organisations, development centres are seen as more 'open' and
'supportive of mistakes' than assessment centres, although
strengths and weaknesses are fed back as profiles after job
simulations. Iles et al (1989) studied a British centre, where
participants reported more thoughts of leaving their career and
less definite career plans and strategies. Perhaps they viewed
mismatches between expectations and abilities and organisational
requirements and plans, which may or may not be in the
organisations' interests, but would appear to indicate an
autonomous outcome. There seem to have been few evaluations of
the centres' effectiveness, however (Iles and Mabey, 1993).
In the grey area of 'manager-employee' planning, it largely
depends upon the how the technique is run. Is coaching job-
specific or a form of mentoring which will stand the person in
good stead in more generic future employ (perhaps gaining
'metaskills' - skills in acquiring new skills; Hall, 1986c)? Is
counselling a largely didactic process or more non-directive,
perhaps in the Rogerian tradition? Is the counsellor the
supervisor or an external advisor?
It should be noted that these divides are not clearcut.
According to Iles and Mabey (1993), some anchoring in the current
job is appreciated by employees. It is also not proven that the
most collaborative methods, whilst being preferred in terms of
reactions, are necessarily the most effective.
Mentoring, classified by Hall (1986a) as another middle range
intervention - may be career-enhancing or psychosocial, although
a combination is apparently better for personal development
(Kram, 1985). A study of MBAs suggests that informal mentoring
is more useful than a formal system, although not necessarily
fair (Iles and Mabey, 1993).
Returning towards the organisational pole briefly, Iles and
Mabey (1993) introduce another anomalous intervention, career
planning workshops - "As participants set their own goals, their
motivation is likely to be enhanced. Unless the goals and
plans are integrated into the organization's career management
systems, however, their value is likely to be limited."
More employee-centred information diffusion methods are not
without flaws. Just how much does job-posting tell people in a
particular specialism about unthought about alternative routes?
More purpose built models may also be criticised.
Career ladders may give too much weight to the way careers
have evolved in the past, ignoring unusual combinations of
individual qualifications and circumstances, and their frequent
failure to consider lateral moves and cross-functional
assignments. Career paths also fail to incorporate the dynamics
of individual career choice and overemphasize lockstep
progression at the expense of the need for individual career
planning. (Gutteridge, 1986).
Kidd (in press) concentrates on self-assessment tools,
emphasising the 'increasing importance of the subjective career
as the building block of development in organizations...' The
MBA study by Iles and Mabey (1993) indicated a favourable
response for this, although there was greater enthusiasm for
career reviews, 'tapping power' and anchored in organisational
reality. This rather suggests, however, that the respondents
were not necessarily autonomous in career direction.
Iles and Mabey (1993) concluded that more positive reactions
were likely to emerge from collaborative rather than controlling
techniques, overt rather than opaque (relevant) ones, and
prospective rather than retrospective ones. They should be
catalytic rather than merely analytic; and anchored in
organisational realities rather than abstract.
It would appear, then, that classification according to focus
on employer or employee does not provide a particularly
meaningful perspective on career development programmes. Perhaps
Joyce Russell's (1991) approach is more useful, considering
interventions according to individuals' career stages. Whilst
admitting the paucity of evidence about the efficacy of
programmes, Russell notes researchers' progress in identifying
psychological needs of employees at various career stages, and
their suggestions of suitable methods for assisting individuals
in these different stages.
We may find that the need (or perceived need) for self-
development tends to differ according to stage. It is possible
that a person in early career is unlikely to need to develop
themselves with a considerable degree of independence. During
the task of establishing themselves, they tend to be encouraged
by others to develop insight into their career orientations, set
realistic career paths and understand the rudiments of career
logics (Greenhaus, 1987); the quality of information is generally
likely to be governed by others. Perhaps a discussion of less
than traditional career logics (e.g. Watts, 1981) could be part
of the literature in pre-employment careers venues.
Also identified as an early career issue by Russell is
achievement. Whilst the use of greater job challenges and
responsibilities, with more constructive performance feedback,
may assist new employees' development and provide more autonomy
than 'sitting by Nellie' techniques, the onus is still with
employers to provide the arena for employees' endeavours. On the
whole, induction into an organisation is primarily one of
integration, however much individuality may be valued.
Environmental forces, however, are very influential in
encouraging non-traditional career paths, 'Protean' careers
(Hall, 1976). Russell (1991) describes the changes in working
conditions in the 1980s, hierarchical structures, providing
career opportunities, being stripped away in the face of mounting
international competition, and with new technology affecting
working practices directly and indirectly. People are faced
with plateauing, threatened or actual job loss - with its
financial and emotional consequences - whilst also facing midlife
problems involving "their pending mortality, physical problems,
and changed relationships with family members .... Sometimes
these difficulties result in a period of crisis for
individuals."
Hall (1986b) considered a heightened sense of ambiguity,
perceived lack of clear career paths or progress, and awareness
of employers' lack of interest to result, ironically, in "a
growing feeling of personal responsibility for one's
career. .... a strong sense of taking charge, assuming
control over one's career." He notes that whilst behaviour in
midcareer involves reducing exploration in favour of establishing
career routine, in midcareer there is a need to disrupt habitual
behavior and trigger exploration. The cycle of psychological
success may be disrupted in midcareer. There is also less
feedback and recognition at midcareer (Hall, 1985), 'which
further reduces psychological success.'
Hall (1986b) predicts a need "to establish new career goals
that would initiate new cycles of the psychological success
experience." The balance also tends to shift from work to
personal roles. Career transitions and life event changes become
increasingly interconnected. (Hall notes that midcareers may
occur at different ages; Gallos, 1989, and other researchers note
this particularly in the careers of many women).
Russell (1991) cites various research suggestions, including:
frequent skills assessments, performance feedback, increased
recognition of good performance, and improved reward systems. It
should be noted that valued rewards may well have changed with
age and circumstances, thus requiring individualised systems.
Career counselling may help to reappraise career goals and
improve self-awareness. She also suggests dual career ladders
for 'advancing professionals', opportunities for mobility via
lateral transfers, project assignments, cross-functional moves,
and job rotation to broaden experience, especially for managers.
Developmental programmes may also update midcareer managers'
skills in particular areas (e.g. computer applications). (Morgan
et al, 1979, reported that in some cases, these were only to be
attended by midcareer managers to avoid feeling threatened by
'rising younger stars').
Downward moves - particularly accompanied by the same pay -
are suggested by Russell. She sees this as an alternative to
dismissal for under-performing, to cut back work hours, or
because employees enjoyed their work more at a lower level.
A more realistic way of inducing employers to pay the same
wages and employees to welcome the move may be to gear reward
systems to successful performance at any given level, as opposed
to the Peter Principle (Peter, 1969). This may give employees
additional incentive to develop in a way which may lead to more
personal fulfilment and more efficiency for the organisation;
psychometric tests, which Iles and Mabey (1993) considered well
received by their respondents, could assist in guidance.
" The late-career period poses different issues for employees
depending on whether they will be moving up in the
organization, down to another position, or out (via retirement
or termination). For a small number of late-career employees,
their major task is to prepare themselves to advance into
senior leadership roles. Succession planning programs are
used ... to refine their management skills ....
" The major tasks of most late-career employees are to
remain productive and to prepare for retirement ..... many of
them have to deal with the aftermath of midcareer obsolescence
or plateauing, and to contend with negative age biases on the
job ... Further, they may be confronted with choosing between
being demoted or terminated. ........... companies need to
understand the unique problems late-career employees
encounter and to help them retire with minimal difficulty."
Russell (1991)
The question with such a programme (Russell's article is set
in a background of U.S.A. anti-discriminatory legislation) is
again one of the employer's incentive to provide suitable
programmes. London and Stumpf (1986), however, recommend that
people aged 55-75 - 'young elders' - should be viewed as valuable
resources. They may be encouraged to become mentors. Also, they
may provide expertise in those areas in which they are not
rendered technologically obsolete; Hall (1986b), referring to
people in midcareer being given trouble-shooting and internal
consulting assignments, gave an example where a company thus
saved itself several million dollars in outside consultancy.
Companies that have not used such strategies (e.g. British
Telecommunications) currently pay immense fees to contractors
previously made redundant. Career resource centres, identified
by Russell (1991) as 'one of the least expensive and increasingly
popular approaches [to providing] career information' could be
harnessed to the realisation of employees' value in non-
traditional career roles (Watts, 1981), perhaps incorporating
self-assessment tools (c.f. Kidd, in press).
In addition to age-related recommendations, Russell (1991)
discusses various 'special target groups'. One such group
comprises supervisors, who could be taught to develop
subordinates (as opposed merely to training them). It is
possible, however, that further advances need to be made in
British industrial culture before such a development could be
sustained without suspicion or bewilderment.
Given the strains inherent within the relationship between
employer and employee, perhaps external bodies could provide
other sources of career assessment, advice, development, support
and guidance. As well as the question as to why employees should
take more control over their own destiny, so heavily
circumscribed and burdened by external forces, one may also ask
if employers are the most appropriate or responsible body for
ascertaining the degree of dependence. As organisations which
cast aside people who are surplus to requirements, they could not
retain an interest if they wanted to. The contradictions are
created by assumptions made within the current liberal paradigm
(19th. century variety).
It has been suggested that organisations and career resource
centres should consider adopting non-traditional career paths as
respectable options. Consideration of developmental stages
within careers could form a useful tool for planning
interventions which should suit individuals and changes in their
circumstances. It is possible that current values - in terms of
reward systems and industrial relations - may not necessarily
remain in their current state. Thus, while more research may be
needed, it is likely that quantitative analyses may not be
meaningful for a considerable time.
REFERENCES
Frese, M. and Zapf, D. (1988) Methodological issues in the study
of work stress: Objective vs. subjective measurement and the
question of longitudinal studies. In Cooper, C. L. and Payne, R.
(eds.) Causes, Coping and Consequences of Stress at Work.
Chichester: Wiley.
Gallos, J. V. (1989) Exploring women's development: implications
for career theory, practice, and research. In Arthur, M. B.,
Hall, D. T. and Lawrence, B. S. (eds.), Handbook of career
theory.
Greenhaus, J. H. (1987) Career Management. Chicago, Ill.:
Dryden Press.
T. G. Gutteridge (1986) Organizational Career Development
Systems: The State of the Practice. In D. T. Hall and
Associates, Career Development in Organizations, Jossey-Bass:
London.
Hall, D. T. (1976) Careers in Organizations. Glenview, Ill.:
Scott, Foresman.
Hall, D. T. (1985) Project Work as an Antidote to Career
Plateauing in a Declining Engineering Organization. Human
Resource Management, 24, 271-292.
D. T. Hall (1986a) An Overview of Current Career Development
Theory, Research and Practice. In D. T. Hall and Associates,
Career Development in Organizations, Jossey-Bass: London.
D. T. Hall (1986b) Breaking Career Routines: Midcareer Choice
and Identity Development. In D. T. Hall and Associates, Career
Development in Organizations, Jossey-Bass: London.
D. T. Hall (1986c) Career Development in Organizations: Where Do
We Go from Here? In D. T. Hall and Associates, Career
Development in Organizations, Jossey-Bass: London.
Hanson, M. E. (1982) Career Development: Maximising Options.
Personnel Administrator, 23(5), pp. 58-61.
Iles, P. A., Robertson, I. T. and Rout, U. (1989) Assessment
based development centres. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
4(3), pp. 11-16.
Iles, P. and Mabey, C. (1993) Managerial Career Development
Programmes: Effectiveness, Availability and Acceptability.
British Journal of Management, 4, 103-118.
Kasl, S. V. (1986) Stress and disease in the workplace: A
methodological commentary on the accumulated evidence. In
Cataldo, M. F. and Coates, T. J. (eds.) Health and Industry: A
Behavioural Medicine Perspective. New York: Wiley.
Kidd, J. (in press) Assessment for Self-Minded Career
Development. Anderson, N. & Herriot, P. (eds) Handbook of
Selection and Appraisal. London: Wiley.
Kram, K. E. (1985) Mentoring at Work. Glenview, Ill.: Scott,
Foresman.
London, M. and Stumpf, S. A. (1982) Managing Careers. Reading,
Massachusetts: Addison Wesley.
London, M. and Stumpf, S. A. (1986) Individual and
Organizational Career Development in Changing Times. In D. T.
Hall and Associates, Career Development in Organizations, Jossey-
Bass: London.
Morgan, M. A., Hall, D. T. and Martier, A. (1979) Career
Development Strategies in Industry - Where Are We and Where
Should We Be? Personnel, March/April, pp. 13-30.
Nisbett, R. E. and Wilson, T. D. (1977) Telling more than we can
know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review,
84, 231-59.
Peter, L. J. (1969) The Peter principle. New York: William
Morrow.
Pringle, J. K. and Gold, U. O. C. (1989) How useful is career
planning for today's managers? Journal of Management
Development, 8(3), pp. 21-26.
Russell, J. E. A. (1991). Career development interventions in
organisations. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 38, 237-287.
Stump, R. W. (1986) Assessing the Impact of Career Development
in Organisations. A Case in Point. Public Personnel Management,
15,(4), pp. 399-413.
Watts, A. G. (1981) Career Patterns. In Watts, A. G., Super, D.
E. and Kidd, J. M. (eds.) Career Development in Britain.
Cambridge: Hobsons Press.
CareerSteer – careers test for career choice www.careersteer.org