Career Management Chapter FOr Q (3) Final.pptx

BSRS 4207 Career Management Chapter (3) Prepared & Delivered by Dr. ADIL AL-BALUSHI , Faculty -, Department of Business Studies , UTAS References Wiernik, B. M., & Wille, B. (2017). Careers, career development, and career management. In D. S. Ones, N. Anderson, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds....

BSRS 4207 Career Management Chapter (3) Prepared & Delivered by Dr. ADIL AL-BALUSHI , Faculty -, Department of Business Studies , UTAS References Wiernik, B. M., & Wille, B. (2017). Careers, career development, and career management. In D. S. Ones, N. Anderson, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 2 Course learning outcomes • On completing this chapter, you should be able to define these key concepts. You should also know about: • Learning outcomes career management theories Theories of Career Development • Career theories can be broadly grouped into three categories— 1. person-environment fit theories, 2. developmental career theories, 3. management career models. Person-Environment Fit Theories • Early career theories focused on assessing important characteristics of individuals and work environments and hypothesized that a match between person and environment would lead to positive outcomes (Parsons, 1909). These theories have been referred to as trait-andfactor or person-environment (P-E) fit theories. Different P-E fit career theories have focused on different sets of constructs, but each shares the hypotheses that the degree to which an individual’s capabilities meet the job’s requirements and the degree to which a job or organization’s features match an individual’s desires are key drivers of employee success, satisfaction, and persistence in a career. • The P-E fit framework has been highly influential in applied settings, both for vocational guidance and for personnel selection (Huo, Huang, & Napier, 2002; Kristof-Brown, 2000), and various forms of P-E fit are related to numerous positive work outcomes (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005; Oh et al., 2014). Despite growing interest in other counseling frameworks, identifying potential careers that match individual characteristics remains the dominant approach in career counseling (Hansen, 2013). Theory of Work Adjustment • Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA) is among the oldest career theories. • TWA includes both a predictive model and a process model. • The predictive model describes the personal and environmental characteristics that are hypothesized to lead to successful work outcomes. • TWA focuses on the needs/values and skills/abilities of an individual, job requirements (vis á vis abilities and skills), and job reinforcers (vis á vis values and needs). • Satisfaction is posited to result when the individual’s needs are met by the job reinforcers, while effective performance (called satisfactoriness) results when the individual’s abilities meet job requirements. • Long-term tenure and career persistence are predicted to occur when both forms of correspondence are present. • When there is mismatch, the TWA process model describes how individuals and environments pursue different adjustment strategies to correct the mismatch, including tolerating some degree of mismatch (flexibility), changing oneself (reactive adjustment; e.g., an individual learning new skills, an organization changing its culture), or changing the other party (active adjustment; e.g., an individual changing their job duties, an organization providing training). • Individuals and organizations attempt these adjustment techniques for a limited period (called their degree of perseverance) before they give up and leave the organization (individuals) or dismiss the employee (organizations). • TWA’s hypotheses have received substantial empirical support (Dawis, 2005), and many of its tenets have been incorporated into other P-E fit models in organizational research, including models for recruitment, selection, socialization, and stress (see Edwards, 2008 for a review). Social Cognitive Career Theory Social Cognitive Career Theory based on general social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1997), focuses on the role of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in driving vocational behavior. While not strictly a personenvironment fit model, SCCT incorporates many features of P-E fit theories into its frameworks for the development of self-efficacy, interests, career choice, and performance behaviors. SCCT draws heavily on research examining the role of interests, values, abilities, and personality traits in vocational behavior, while also emphasizing the impact of contextual factors, self-efficacy, and change in personal and environmental characteristics over time. • The current conceptualization of SCCT consists of four predictive models describing • (1) interest development, • (2) career choices, • (3) educational and vocational performance, and • (4) work and career satisfaction (Lent, 2013b). • • The interest model hypothesizes that interests in specific fields form as a result of positive task-related self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and learning experiences. The choice model posits that interests work in tandem with self-efficacy (influenced by abilities and skills), outcome expectations (influenced by work values), and contextual factors to mold an individual’s career goals and educational and occupational choices. • The performance model predicts that self-efficacy beliefs, goal setting, and ability lead to effective performance, while the satisfaction model predicts that self-efficacy beliefs, goal attainment, work conditions, and affect-related personality traits contribute to work satisfaction. • SSCT self-management model specifies a large set of adaptive career behaviors (“behaviors individuals employ to help direct their own career development,” p. 559) and predicts how self-efficacy, outcome expectations, contextual factors, and general personality traits are related to different classes of these behaviors. • SCCT has received the most empirical research attention of any contemporary career theory (Lent & Brown, 2013; Savickas, 2013), and it is also the career theory that remains the most connected to advances from other fields of psychology, including advances in personality and cognitive ability models, biological and developmental psychology, and personnel selection and performance modeling. Management Career Models While person-environment fit theories focus on identifying predictors of career choice and success and vocational developmental models examine the processes through which individuals make career decisions and develop career identities, career models developed in management, organizational behavior, industrial-work-organizational psychology, and related fields usually focus on individuals’ observable patterns of movement between different jobs, roles, and employers and their attitudes toward these transitions. • In recent decades, career research has been concerned with the implications of broad societal and economic changes, such as globalization, technological advances, and declining job security, for the way individuals and organizations manage careers. Career scholars have suggested that these societal shifts have resulted in dramatic changes to individual careers. While “traditional” careers (alternately called organizational, linear, or bureaucratic careers) were characterized by lifetime employment in a single organization, • advancement up a linear organizational hierarchy, and development opportunities determined by organizational superiors (Arnold & Cohen, 2008), career scholars argue that contemporary careers are characterized by high levels of mobility and individual initiative. The degree to which such changes have actually occurred appears to be overstated. boundaryless career The two most popular alternatives to traditional careers are the boundaryless career and the protean career. The boundaryless career (Arthur, 2014; Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Sullivan & Arthur, 2006) is a career path characterized by independence from any single employer for work success, resources, and advancement. In the original descriptions of the concept, the “boundary” in boundaryless careers referred specifically to the boundaries between organizations. Originally, DeFillippi and Arthur (1994) focused specifically on employment across organizations and defined the boundaryless career as “sequences of job opportunities that go beyond the boundaries of single employment settings” (p. 307 Arthur and Rousseau (1996) expanded the concept and described six organizational boundaries that have been relaxed during the era of the boundaryless career: 1. Movement between separate employers. 2. Gaining reputation and validation from external sources (e.g., academic researchers). 3. Drawing support from outside networks or information sources. 4. Advancing in ways other than up an organizational hierarchy (e.g., lateral moves). 5. Favoring personal or family concerns over career opportunities. 6. Perceiving one’s career as “boundaryless” despite constraints. CONTACT INFORMATION: Name of the Staff : Dr ADIL KHAMIS AL-BALUSHI Office:: BS043 Email: adil.albalushi@hct,edu.om VERSION HISTORY Version No Date Approved 01 Sem. (2) 2022/2023 Changes incorporated 24