Introduction
A career has been defined as “the individually perceived sequence of attitudes and behaviours associated with work-related experiences and activities over the span of the person’s life”[1]. Career theory involves attention to two aspects: the individually focused or subjective career which is based on an individual’s perception of working life; and the organizationally focused or objective career, relating to the career ladder
A key element in traditional approaches to career development has been the matching between individual and organizational perspectives, of key processes in human resource planning and development such as recruitment and selection, training and development, work opportunities and feedback, promotion and other career movement, supervision and coaching, career counselling and organizational rewards[3]. This has usually included the identification of career paths and provision of information and training for individuals who could progress in them[4] or the provision of fast track schemes for a small and élite group of employees[5]. In both organizational and personal terms, career success in the past has been characterized by upward mobility in organizational hierarchies.
However, the current search by organizations for a competitive edge and the resultant increased workloads, restricted budgets and structural transformations, have meant that there is now often a mismatch – or at the very least considerable tension – between the positions of the organization and the individual on issues such as work opportunities, career counselling and promotion. From an organizational standpoint there has never been a greater need for high motivation and high performance among all employees so that organizational effectiveness and competition in global markets can be maximized. Traditionally, such high performance has often been rewarded by promotion. From an individual’s standpoint, opportunities for formal recognition of their skills and abilities have increased with NVQs/SVQs, and for many, success of this kind is associated with expectations of career progress through the organizational hierarchy. Yet there is ample evidence of the removal of many of the vertical career steps traditionally associated with career success, through delayering[6,7].
Expectations of careerdevelopment
between individual and organizational expectations of issues relating to performance and career development, with all the potentially negative effects on employee motivation and resultant performance. In companies the response has been described as a growing awareness of the need for a career development strategy which recognizes the importance of the employee, and puts the individual rather than the post at its centre[8], and there is some evidence, of self development being considered as an appropriate route towards this. Self development, as applied to learning, is defined as meaning “that the individual takes primary responsibility for his/her own learning and methods s/he will use to achieve this and so a self development approach to career development puts the responsibility for managing the career fairly and squarely with the individual. A move towards self development in career development parallels changes in the human resource development field more generally where self development for all is a key cornerstone of some of the new visions of organizations for the future, such as The Learning Company.
However, this approach is very different from traditional practice in many organizations where the expectations regarding the responsibility for career development are that it is the domain of the human resource specialists and line managers, rather than the individual employee. A move towards a self-development approach would seem to involve a substantial change in expectations and attitudes to career development. In recognition of the different situations in which organizations find themselves in the 1990s, Herriot et al. point to the need to establish new psychological career contracts which involve organizations in discovering and making explicit their expectations of their employees, and in understanding their employees’ career expectations.
Case study
This area of career development expectations was the focus of a recent study in a large private sector organization. The company has over 36,000 employees in three divisions: brewing, licensed retailing and short-break leisure and has an annual sales turnover of over £1,769m. Group operating profit in 1994 of over £250 million was significantly higher than the previous year. The organization was described as moving away from group policies and overall group identity and becoming more fragmented and diverse – divisions were operating now as autonomous units with their own mission statements and business plans. The implementation of human resource policies varied across these divisions, although overall terms and conditions are among some of the best in the industry. Recent delayering initiatives which had been accompanied by generous financial packages had been less contentious than anticipated.
Research was carried out within the licensed retailing and brewing divisions to explore views on career development issues. A previous qualitative study carried out by the company had explored managers’ perceptions of issues relating to training, performance/career review, promotion/career development
Strategy and questionnaire development
The general view expressed by managers was that the responsibility for career management rested squarely with the company that “someone will make up my mind for me”. Top management confirmed that there was a perception among managers in the company that “someone is watching over my career development”, and that the company should tell them “try this next”. However, she felt that this view required to be changed. “Since there are no ladders now, the onus is on individuals to take responsibility for their own development…there is a need to change to the self-development approach”. Clearly the company and individual managers’ expectations of who is responsible for career development are now different. Managers were aware of these changing company expectations but felt ill equipped to deal with them. Concerns about the implications for them of a change to a self-development approach were raised in the focused group discussions. The increased responsibility on the individual and the realization that “in many cases the individual does not have the knowledge or tools to develop himself” were particular worries. A related issue was the availability of information for career management purposes. It has been argued that an important difference between traditional and self-development approaches to career development exists in the need for access to information. In the latter, the availability of information is said to be important regarding training and educational opportunities; about the organization’s structure, jobs, numbers of employees; how the organization sees the future, i.e. its business plans, manpower projections, predicted future skills requirements, so that the individual can devise a “career map” which will help them to consider career options. Almost half of the managers (42 per cent) in the case study organization stated that they did not have access to such information at present and a similar proportion (43 per cent) highlighted lack of information about career guidance as the second most important barrier to their career development. There was also little opportunity to discuss career development issues. A possible vehicle for such discussion might have been the performance/career review interview.
In this case study organization, communication about the importance of the career development advice given by the line manager is required and training and education of line managers in handling career related discussions are critical to equipping them to meet the new expectations of them in this role.
Differing expectations also exist as to the role of line managers in career guidance, and to be able to meet new expectations, line managers require education and training to enable them to act effectively as developers of their managers and their careers. There are also tensions between the view that promotion means vertical progression and lack of opportunities in the hierarchy so that expectations of managers with respect to promotion routes within the organization are at odds with the reality of horizontal progression in career advancement. While male and female managers encountered the same barriers to their career development, an interesting change was that more male managers perceived family commitments as a barrier to their career. In addition, there are organizational barriers to introducing new approaches to career development in areas of human resource and information policies, which reflect past vertical perspectives of career progression. Influencing attitudes and expectations There is some evidence that in the USA there is recognition of these varying expectations and implementation of action to manage them. Some American organizations are working towards creating what has been called a “career resilient” workforce. These are employees who take responsibility for their own career, are committed to the idea of continuous learning, and who are committed to the organization’s success. However, this requires a “sea change in attitudes and values … that the usual view of a career path must change.
Changing attitude
It may be that one approach to assisting organizations in changing attitudes and behaviour with regard to career responsibility and management is to engage with the principles of social marketing. This term was first introduced by Kotler and Zaltman describe the use of marketing techniques to advance a social cause. Since then the term has come to mean social change management involving the design, implementation and control of programmes aimed at increasing the acceptability of a social idea or practice. In recent years social change campaigns have focused on health reforms (e.g. anti-smoking, drug abuse); environmental reforms (e.g. clean air, safe water); educational reforms (e.g. adult literacy); and economic reforms (develop job skills and training). In this instance, career development could be the focus of social change. This would involve changing the assumptions and expectations of existing and potential employees and employers to career management.
The overall aims of the social campaign would be:
• To inform individuals that, because of the pace of organizational change, career success can comprise lateral rather than solely vertical moves;
• To inform that it is an inappropriate assumption to expect that their organization will plan a career for them;
• To propose that individuals should take responsibility for career management;
• To recommend that line managers play a positive role in this process. The two objectives of such a social change programme could be:
(1) To achieve cognitive change regarding career development by providing new information to employers and employees, to raise awareness and understanding of a self-development approach to career management. This would stress that the nature of career development is different and now involves primarily horizontal movement through opportunities such as job rotation, job enrichment and secondments, rather than purely vertical progression; and that the primary responsibility for her/his career management rests with the individual.
(2) To facilitate behavioural change by inducing employees and employers to act differently on matters of career management: to unlearn old habits; learn new habits and maintain new patterns of behaviour.
This would be achieved by both the organization in devising policies and practices which place the individual at the centre of career development strategy, and the individual by engaging in proactive behaviour in managing their own careers. Kotler and Roberto emphasize that mass
communication messages are typically insufficient for the purpose of achieving behavioural change and therefore should be supplemented by interpersonal interventions and personal communications.
Line managers would have a particularly important role here in communicating with employees and allowing them access to, and valuing, lateral career development opportunities. The five core elements of any social change programme would be applied to career
Development as follows:
Cause
The cause or issue to be addressed is the re-education of the workforce and organizations in career development practice for today’s employment environment. The social objective would be a change in attitudes to the nature of success in career progression to include lateral moves; and a change to individuals taking a proactive approach to managing their careers rather than assuming their employer has this in hand.
Change agent
There could be two levels of change agents. At the macro level, national bodies
such as the Training Enterprise Councils (TECs) and Local Enterprise Companies (LECs) could play an important role in influencing companies’ attitudes to career development. At the organizational level, chief executives and human resource specialists would have key roles to play in influencing individual employees’ attitudes to career development.
Target adopters
These are the people whose attitudes and behaviours are to be changed and they can be individuals, groups, or entire populations. In this context target adopters could be the local business community; unemployed people; and line managers and individual employees in specific organizations.
Channels
These are the means of communication through which information and responses are exchanged between change agents and target adopters. At the macro level, this could be through a government funded training scheme such as Skill Seekers or Employment Training into which an educational element about the nature of career management is included. At the organizational level this could be through the training and development of line managers on their role in career management; and through the provision of career development workshops.
Change strategy
This is the direction and programme developed by a change agent to achieve the change in the target adopter’s attitudes and behaviours. At the macro level the change strategy adopted by the LECs/TECs could be directed at their local business community and the unemployed to encourage them to adopt new career development practices as a means of achieving a highly motivated workforce with a high performance level. At the micro level, the change strategy would be targeted at line managers and individual employees with
Expectations of career development
Chief executives supporting and promoting these new new ideas about career development. In addition, human resource specialists would ensure that the adoption of the new ideas was reflected in human resource strategies in related areas, particularly remuneration and fringe benefits.
Conclusion
One important outcome of the current common condition of organizational transformation is that there is a growing divergence between the perspectives of organizations and individuals as to expectations of careers. The outcome of this could lead to individuals’ expectations of career development not being met within their organizations, which would have a negative impact on their motivation and performance levels. There are various options in dealing with this situation. One is to do nothing, and accept that employees may become demotivated, or seek alternative employment elsewhere. Some organizations may be unhappy with the loss of skills, investment in training, and performance which the latter embodies. A second alternative is proposed here and this involves raising awareness of this current dilemma, with a view to devising ways of changing expectations on the nature of career success. This would take place at two levels – at the society level through the LEC/TEC network, and at the organizational level through communication, training and education, with chief executives, human resource specialists and line managers as key stakeholders. It is contended here that this is a worthy social cause to which the principles of social marketing could be addressed, and that it should be considered by LECs, TECs and individual organizations