Career management and employability
Career management and employability
Annamaria Di Fabio
Responsabile del Laboratorio internazionale di Ricerca e Intervento in Psicologia per l’orientamento professionale, il career counseling e i Talenti (LabOProCCareer&T) e del Laboratorio internazionale di ricerca e intervento in Psicologia Positiva, Prevenzione e Sostenibilità (PosPsychP&S), Dipartimento di Scienze della Formazione e Psicologia, Università degli Studi di Firenze, http://www.scifopsi.unifi.it/vp-30-laboratori.html
Tommaso Cumbo
Responsabile Linea Università, Programma FIXO Scuola e Università, Italia Lavoro S.p.A, Roma
Sommario
This contribution delineates the evolution of the concept of career from the 20th to the 21st century, from predetermined and predictable development through established stages to flexibility and change in relation to fluid organizations and liquid societies. The evolution of the definition of the employability construct is subsequently presented and the instruments available to detect this construct are described. The pillar of accountability for interventions in the 21st century in support of employability and professional career management is then introduced. Finally a reflection on services in support of employability is offered.
Parole chiave
career management, career service, employability, accountability
Abstract
This contribution delineates the evolution of the concept of career from the 20th to the 21st century, from predetermined and predictable development through established stages to flexibility and change in relation to fluid organizations and liquid societies. The evolution of the definition of the employability construct is subsequently presented and the instruments available to detect this construct are described. The pillar of accountability for interventions in the 21st century in support of employability and professional career management is then introduced. Finally a reflection on services in support of employability is offered.
Keywords
career management, career service, employability, accountability
The evolution of the concept of career
The evolution of the concept of career from the 20th to the 21st century can be useful for a greater understanding of the complexity of the current world of work scenario (Di Fabio & Cumbo, 2016). Individuals are currently increasingly called upon to take responsibility for the direction that their personal and professional lives will take (Guichard, 2013; Savickas, 2011, 2013). In a context where the possibility of predicting employment prospects is strongly limited, the construction of one’s professional path is placed increasingly in the hands of the individual rather than the organization (Duarte, 2004), working transitions are becoming more frequent and sometimes unexpected (Savickas, 2011), and in this scenario, individuals are asked to be pre-concerned not only with the development of knowledge and technical competences in a certain field, but also of their own skills in coping, problem-solving (Murphy, Blustein, Bohlig, & Platt, 2010) and adaptability (Savickas, 2011).
In the 20th century, a career was characterized by a predetermined and predictable evolution through established stages (Super, 1957, 1980), constituting a sequence of work activities of an individual during the time (Arthur, Hall, & Lawrence, 1989) or a hierarchical progression of positions associated to the occupation, roles, activities, and experience of a person (Arnold, 1997). At the end of the 20th century, a career was still defined as a lifelong progression in learning and work (Watts, 1999), a succession of vocational activities carried out throughout one’s lifetime (Osipow, 1999) through a career that is realized within stable organizations (Savickas, 2011). However, from the last few years of the 20th century, it is understandable how a career considered as a hierarchical progression within a single organization no longer exists; attention is centred on experiences of person in terms of development and lifelong learning, and the concept of a “dead career” (Collins, 1996) is widespread. On this basis, in the 21st century a career can no longer be characterized by stability and security but by flexibility and change (Di Fabio & Cumbo, 2016; Savickas, 2011), in relation to fluid organizations and liquid societies (Bauman, 2000; Guichard, 2013).
Below, a brief review of the most important contributions for understanding the concept of careers in the 21st century is presented.
The concept of boundaryless career (Arthur, 1994; Arthur & Rousseau, 1996) extends the concept of a career to one delineated as a path realized through various organizations (Fraccaroli, 2005), therefore not confined to a single organization and not definable as a linear sequence of work activities and positions (Briscoe, Hall, & DeMuth, 2006). According to this, a career includes the ability to move across boundaries which are not only organizational and occupational but also cultural, and to detect various opportunities for professional growth (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; DeFillippi & Arthur, 1994).
The concept of resilient career (Waterman, Waterman, & Collard, 1994) considers resilience as another significant factor for workers in the post-modern era, in terms of the ability to successfully face and overcome adversities (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004), the ability to adapt and to accept change positively, to use coping strategies to deal with critical issues (Bimrose, Barnes, & Hughes, 2008) and to transform these critical issues into resources (Di Fabio, 2014c).
The concept of intelligent career (Arthur, Claman, & DeFillippi, 1995; DeFillippi & Arthur, 1996) is focused on the importance of three career competences, which are “know how, know who, know why”. The first, “know how”, includes knowledge, abilities, attitudes, values, needs and motivations that enable individuals to engage in activities that they are able to terminate. The second career competence, “know who”, is related to the social network to which individuals belong and in which they take on a special role. The third career competence, “know why”, regards the meanings that people offer to different contexts and activities associated with their expectations of life. Individuals can clarify their personal aims and choose occupations that allow them to attain these, also on the basis of their ability to adaptively gather information on opportunities in the world of work, on standards and procedures, on resources and on social networks that can support the responsible construction of their own career path.
The concept of portfolio career (Cawsey, Deszca, & Mazerolle, 1995), relative to the construction of a portfolio of knowledge and abilities to be presented to organizations or potential clients, underlines the importance of taking responsibility for one’s own professional project. This is in reference especially to fixed-term workers, who possess useful qualifications and abilities to carry out specific projects. They are, on the one hand different from temporary workers, who are under-qualified and employed for simple and time-limited activities, and, on the other hand different from core workers (Guichard, 2007), who possess the necessary knowledge and competences to sustain the productivity of the organization for a long time and over time (Templer & Casey, 1999). In this sense the concept of portfolio career is not associated with a process of vertical career development centred on particular functions, but with a horizontal process of career development centred on business partnerships and specific contracts (Byron, 1995).
The reference of individual responsibilities in the construction of one’s own professional path also emerges in the concept of protean career (Hall, Briscoe, & Kram, 1996). Individuals, rather than organizations, take responsibility for developing their own professional and personal lives, through various experiences in terms of training, internships and work in different contexts. Taking care of the improvement of one’s own knowledge, abilities and competences, it is important to respond promptly to questions and changes of the world of work as well as to one’s own self-realization needs.
At the same time, the concept of post-corporate career (Peiperl & Baruch, 1997) has spread in response to the limited possibility for career progress, traditionally considered within the same organization. The modality of entrepreneurial work has thus been introduced, both in terms of autonomous work and the creation of small and medium-sized enterprises. It is important to underline that for some individuals the entrepreneurial modality is their preferred one, while for others it is a “mandatory” modality and alternative to working in large companies.
In line with what has been previously illustrated, the concept of multidirectional career (Baruch, 2004) emerges. People can (or must) choose among many career alternatives and are aware of the existence of various possibilities for obtaining success. Therefore, a vision of career is configured that includes both aspects of complexity and opportunities for multidirectional career paths.
An analogical form to delineate the concept of career is represented by the concept of kaleidoscope career (Mainiero & Sullivan, 2005). Like a kaleidoscope that generates ever-changing patterns when the tube is rotated and the glass fragments are moving in different positions, so too do people change their career paths by changing different elements in their lives to re-organize roles, activities and relationships according to new ways. The concept of kaleidoscope career highlights three relevant aspects in the re-organization of one’s own professional and personal path, in other words, authenticity, about always being oneself; balancing, regarding the ability to make decisions in one’s own personal and professional life to reach a balance; acceptance of the challenge, in reference to commitment in activities for which individuals assume responsibility, exercise control and are autonomous in their own development.
It has recently been possible to identify the concept of inclusive career in the inclusive psychology of working theory (Blustein, 2006), which highlights the fact that work responds to three needs: the need for survival and power, the need for social relations and the need for self-determination. Afterwards Blustein (2011) enriches his theoretical perspective through the relational theory of working.
Within a relational perspective, work is configured as an inherently relational act; thereby relationships can help shape every decision, experience and interaction with the world of work (Blustein, 2011). Relationships are considered fundamental resources for work (Blustein, 2011; Di Fabio, 2014c) and thus a vision of relational career could be delineated.
A further recent distinction emerging from literature is between objective career and subjective career (Savickas, 2005). A career can be objectively defined as a series of occupations in which the person is involved and subjectively defined as a series of stories on the basis of work experiences, which can enable the individual to give a personal meaning to past, present and future experiences (Savickas, 2005). In reference to the subjective career, people can give a direction and a meaning to their vocational behaviour through their personal vision of reality (Savickas, 2005), in order to construct a personal success formula (Savickas, 2011) which enables the transition from story to action.
Placing careers in the liquid society (Bauman, 2000) of the post-modern era, Guichard (2013) develops the concept of career capital on various competences which are useful to people in order to explore who they really are and their expectations about the results of their efforts, in line with the concept of identity capital (Côté, 1996).
It has also recently been possible to delineate the notion of purposeful career within the concept of identitarian awareness as an expression of the Purposeful Self (Di Fabio, 2014b, 2014c), highlighting the importance to construct in an autonomous and self-determined way one’s own professional and personal path, according to the most significant objectives for the person and with one’s own authentic self to achieve the full realization of the self (Di Fabio, 2014c) through continuous and recursive processes of self-attunement (Di Fabio, 2014c).
Employability
A very important construct for understanding more in depth the characteristics of complexity in the 21st century and the abilities required of individuals is that of employability. First of all, it is important to underline that this construct is not synonymous with employment, but currently appears as a fundamental characteristic for individuals, since it includes personal aspects relating both to possessing professional updated competences and to adapting to the context in order to multiply employment opportunities (Fugate, Kinicki, & Ashforth, 2004). It is therefore necessary to consider what employment options people perceive themselves as having and what factors influence this perception (Rothwell & Arnold, 2007).
In literature, various definitions of the concept of employability exist (Di Fabio, 2013b, in press; Di Fabio & Bucci, 2013, 2015; Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2013) and they focus on different elements: job retention (Hillage & Pollard, 1998); personal resources (Fugate et al., 2004); attitudes aimed at the development and maintenance of employability (Van Dam, 2004); occupational expertise, anticipation, optimization, the balance between professional and personal needs (Van der Heijde & Van der Heijden, 2006); sustainability, qualifications, a future-oriented perspective (Rothwell & Arnold, 2007); satisfaction and success (Dacre Pool & Sewell, 2007); meta-competences (adaptability, self-knowledge, career orientation awareness, sense of purpose and self-esteem) (Coetzee, 2008); internal and external factors (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2011); and sustainability (van der Klink et al., 2016).
In particular, Hillage and Pollard (1998) explain employability as the ability to find a first job, to keep it and find a new one if necessary, on the basis of the connection between personal characteristics (career management skills, job searching and strategic approach) and context (characteristics of the labour market).
In the definition by Fugate et al. (2004), employability is considered as a psychosocial construct that comprises a synergic combination of three dimensions: professional identity, personal adaptability and human capital. It regards something more and more complex as far as professional motivation, personal initiative and proactive personality are concerned, aspects included in this construct. It promotes the recognition of opportunity in the world of work and the generation of new opportunities.
Van Dam (2004) also diffused the concept of the attitude of workers favourable to interventions focused on increasing organizational flexibility by developing and maintaining employability for the organization. Interventions for employability often involve a change in the situation of the current role of workers. To increase their employability, workers may change role, profession and organization, or attend training courses.
Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden (2006) introduce a definition of employability based on an individual perception that involves professional expertise, anticipation (being able to understand in advance which factors can favour one’s own employability), optimization (being able to invest in a targeted manner in actions to enhance one’s own employability) and the balance between professional and personal needs.
Subsequently, Rothwell and Arnold (2007) define employability as the perceived ability to obtain a sustainable appropriate occupation in relation to one’s own level of qualification. Furthermore, in a future-oriented perspective, employability appears as the ability of individuals to proactively face the challenges of the labour market (Rothwell & Arnold, 2007).
Dacre Pool and Sewell (2007) sustain the concept of employability in reference to a set of abilities, knowledge and personal characteristics that increase the likelihood that individuals choose occupations in which they feel satisfied and can be successful.
Coetzee (2008) considers employability by referring to meta-competences (adaptability, self-knowledge, career orientation awareness, sense of purpose and self-esteem), enabling people to be proactive agents for career management.
De Cuyper and De Witte (2011) introduce employability as an individual perception of available work opportunities and of the role of both internal factors (training of individuals to increase their employability) and external factors (economic conditions and the structure of the labour market). And employability also includes, according to authors, the ability to reach and maintain one’s desired job.
Recently, the concept of sustainable employability has been proposed (van der Klink et al., 2016), which involves the personal values, work meanings and well-being of individuals. Sustainable employability regards the fact that workers, through their working lives, can obtain concrete opportunities in terms of competences. They can also acquire the appropriate conditions in order to exercise a valuable contribution through their work in the present and in the future, while protecting at the same time their health and well-being.
In literature, internal factors and external factors that can influence employability are underlined (Rothwell & Arnold, 2007). Internal factors regard the following aspects: knowledge and abilities related to work and mastering job searches (Hillage & Pollard, 1998); and learning potential (training activities that individuals can take to increase their employability) (Lane, Puri, Cleverly, Wylie, & Rajan, 2000). External factors include the characteristics of the labour market, in terms of employment opportunities for a certain kind of degree, a determined profession or specific competences (Kirschenbaum & Mano-Negrin, 1999; Lane et al., 2000; Rajan, 1997).
Employability is thus configured as a concept capable of promoting reflection on different aspects related to careers, work and the meaning of one’s own life (Bernaud, Lhotellier, Sovet, Arnoux-Nicolas, & Pelayo, 2016; Di Fabio, 2014b; Guichard, 2013; Savickas, 2011), facilitating construction of self and of one’s own career (Di Fabio, in press). It is a dynamic and evolving construct, in line with the changes of the post-modern era. The following instruments, which are available to detect the employability construct, are reported on the basis of the evolution of such a construct (Di Fabio, in press).
Employability Orientation Scale (Van Dam, 2004): is composed of 7 items with a response format on a Likert scale of five points (from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree). It was developed in line with the definition of employment orientation: workers' attitudes towards the development of their employability for the organization (Van Dam, 2004, p. 29). Examples of items: “If the organization needs me to perform different tasks, I am prepared to change my work activities”; “I find it important to develop myself in a broad sense, so I will be able to perform different task activities or jobs within the organization”; “In case of organizational changes, I would prefer to stay in my department with my colleagues”. The scale is one-dimensional with good internal consistency.
Competence-Based Measurement of Employability (CBME, Van der Heijde & Van der Heijden, 2006): is composed of 47 items on a 6-point Likert scale (from 1 = Strongly disagree to 6 = Strongly agree). It was developed in line with the definition of employability by Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden’s (2006), which indicates five dimensions of perceived employability: occupational expertise (example of item: “I consider myself competent to engage in in-depth, specialist discussions in my job domain”); anticipation and optimization (example of item: “I take responsibility for maintaining my labour market value”); personal flexibility (example of item: “I adapt to developments within my organization”); corporate sense (example of item: “In my organization, I take part in forming a common vision of values and goals”); balance (example of item: “My work and private life are evenly balanced”. The psychometric properties of the instrument were verified in workers and in their supervisors. The five-dimensional structure was confirmed through confirmatory factor analysis. The instrument also has good reliability. Predictive validity is supported through relationships with an increase in hierarchical level and/or with a significant increase in work responsibilities; financial success in terms of high earnings (monthly); and number of periods of unemployment longer than one month in one’s entire career.
Self-Perceived Employability Scale for Students (SPES; Rothwell, Herbert, & Rothwell, 2007; Italian version by Di Fabio & Bucci, 2015; Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2013): is composed of 16 items on a 5-point Likert scale (form 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree). It was developed according to the definition by Rothwell and Arnold (2007), which refers to the perceived ability to achieve an appropriate and sustainable occupation in relation to one’s own level of qualifications. It distinguishes four aspects of employability in university students: beliefs about self, beliefs about one’s university, beliefs about one’s field of study, and beliefs about the state of the labour market. Examples of items: “I regard my academic work as a top priority”, “Employers are eager to employ graduates from my university”, “My degree is seen as leading to a specific career that is generally perceived as highly desirable”, “There is generally a strong demand for graduates at the present time”. The psychometric properties of the original version of the instrument were verified on university students. The scale is unidimensional with good reliability. It has also discriminant validity from university commitment. The SPES is a valid and reliable instrument also in the Italian context, both with university students and with high school students (Di Fabio & Bucci, 2013).
Dispositional Measure of Employability (DME, Fugate & Kiniki, 2008; Italian version by Di Fabio & Bucci, 2017) is composed of 25 items on a 5-point Likert scale (form 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree). It was developed according to the definition by Fugate et al. (2004), which considers employability as a psychosocial construct, with five dimensions: Work and career resilience (example of item: “I am optimistic about my future career opportunities”); Openness to changes at work (example of item: “I feel changes at work generally have positive implications”); Work and career proactivity (example of item: “I stay abreast of developments relating to my type of job”); Career motivation (example of item: “I have participated in training or schooling that will help me reach my career goals”); Work identity (example of item: “I define myself by the work that I do”). Three independent studies were carried out on workers to establish the validity of the DME. Using exploratory factor analysis (Study 1) and confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2), the five-dimensional structure was confirmed. The third study confirmed the stability of the DME and offered support for its construct validity showing longitudinally that employability is significantly connected with positive emotions of workers and affective commitment in relation to organizational changes. All the studies showed a good reliability of the DME.
Employability Attributes Scale (EAS, Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010) is composed of 49 items on a 6-point Likert scale (form 1 = Strongly disagree to 6 = Strongly agree). It was developed according to the definition of employability by Coetzee (2008), which introduced the concept of meta-competences. The scale detects seven dimensions: career self-management, cultural competence, self-efficacy, career resilience, sociability, entrepreneurial orientation and proactivity. An exploratory factor analysis (Coetzee, 2010) and a correlational analysis among items offered evidence that the items of the EAS meet psychometric criteria of construct validity. In terms of reliability (internal consistency), Cronbach’s Alpha values for each sub-scale are satisfying (Coetzee, 2010).
The available instruments allow us to measure different aspects of employability according to different definitions, detecting various components of the construct and its evolution (Di Fabio, in press).
In relation to employability, analysis of literature shows studies both on antecedents and outcomes (both subjective and objective).
The studies on the antecedents of employability include human capital and opportunities of the labour market (Berntson, Sverke, & Marklund, 2006); education, support for career and skill development, current level of job-related skills, willingness to change work, willingness to develop new competences, awareness of opportunities, self-presentation competences (Wittekind, Raeder, & Grote, 2010); personality traits (Di Fabio & Bucci, 2013; Wille, De Fruyt, & Feys, 2013) and emotional intelligence (Dacre Pool & Qualter, 2013; Di Fabio & Bucci, 2013; Di Fabio & Kenny, 2015).
In relation to outcomes of employability, empirical studies are limited and refer above all to subjective outcomes (De Cuyper, Bernhard-Oettel Berntson, De Witte, & Alarco, 2008; De Cuyper, Notelaers, & De Witte, 2009; Lu, Sun, & Du, 2015). They are specifically outcomes studied in the organizational field, such as job and life satisfaction (De Cuyper et al., 2008; De Cuyper et al., 2009), affective commitment (De Cuyper et al., 2009), emotional exhaustion and turnover intention (Lu et al., 2015). Regarding objective outcomes, employability was analysed only in relation to success in job searching (McQuaid, 2006) and in relation to health subsequent to the obtaining of a job (Berntson & Marklund, 2007). Therefore the objective outcomes of employability deserve further study.
The pillar of accountability for intervention in the 21st century to support employability and the development of an educational and professional career
In the 21st century, which is characterized by a deep economic crisis, the need to design and realize guidance and career counseling interventions according to the accountability perspective emerge, since they are effective and efficient, optimizing the limited available economic resources (Di Fabio, 2014a; Whiston, 1996, 2001). Accountability (Whiston, 2001) refers specifically to an attention to the costs of services, the effectiveness of interventions, and the best practices supported by research. The most critical aspect regards the effectiveness of interventions in relation to the construction of contemporary and innovative approaches for career services, guidance paths, and career counseling (Di Fabio, 2012; Di Fabio & Maree, 2012; Maree, 2012). The ultimate aim is to satisfy the needs of people in the 21st century and to increase personal and professional resources for life and work projectuality (Di Fabio, 2014b), to support employability and educational and professional careers (Di Fabio, 2014a).
A connected issue, which is fundamental in the perspective of accountability, regards the modality of verifying the effectiveness of interventions (Di Fabio, 2014a; Sexton, Schofield, & Whiston, 1997; Whiston, 2001), because for effectiveness it is not thinkable to consider only the participation of people in the guidance and career counseling paths or their satisfaction about the intervention (Di Fabio, 2014a; Di Fabio, Bernaud, & Kenny, 2013). To answer this question we can refer to the guidelines for accountability (Di Fabio, 2014a): 1) the pillar of accountability (Di Fabio, 2014a; Whiston, 1996, 2001); 2) attention to the choice of outcome criteria for evaluating effective career counseling: effective outcomes in relation to different interventions, use of different measures from multiple perspectives (Di Fabio, 2014a; Whiston, 1996, 2008); 3) a new paradigm and, as consequence, new perspectives for the 21st century: the evolution of assessment for career intervention, from scores of scale to scores and stories (Di Fabio, 2014a; Di Fabio & Maree, 2013; McMahon & Patton, 2012); 4) a move from tradition to innovation in a quali+quanti perspective (Di Fabio, 2012, 2014a; Di Fabio & Maree, 2013a; Maree, 2012); 5) the need for new qualitative measures to detect narrative change (Hartung, 2010a, 2010b, 2013; Rehfuss, 2009; Rehfuss & Di Fabio, 2012); 6) the need to consider new quantitative evidence of outcomes, more congruent with narrative and life design intervention (Di Fabio, 2014a); 7) the need for new methodologies of intervention compatible with accountability principles (less costs + effectiveness) (Di Fabio, 2012; Di Fabio & Maree, 2012, 2013; Whiston, 1996, 2001) in order to verify the effectiveness of interventions (Di Fabio, 2014a); 8) different outcome criteria adapted to differentiated objectives of interventions on the basis of the new taxonomy for interventions by Guichard (2013) (information, guidance, dialogue); 9) the need for a positive psychology perspective in career-life management: positive information, positive guidance, positive dialogue to reinforce individual strength and self-attunement (Di Fabio, 2014a, 2014b, 2014c); 10) the consequent need to use outcomes of positive psychology to verify the effectiveness of interventions (Di Fabio, 2014a).
Furthermore, the new methodology of the power of the audience (Di Fabio & Maree, 2012; Di Fabio, 2013a; Di Fabio, 2014a, 2014b) can be used to realize interventions of career and life construction, in the perspective of accountability. This methodology of intervention does not constitute group work as it is traditionally considered but involves a specific theoretical framework, according to which participants undergo individual work on the self through exercises in written form and are provided with moments when, in a circle, they interact individually with the career counselor. In this sense, the career counselor psychologist supports them in their exploration of self and in the recognition of meaning, while the other members of the group serve as the audience, in other words, listening to the stimuli of the others but not intervening directly.
The group members are therefore considered as participants in an individual intervention and, simultaneously, they have the opportunity to listen to the observations and insights given to others as spectators. They can then use, for self-reflection, the work that each participant does, in turn, with the professional (Di Fabio & Maree, 2012).
This methodology, in the accountability perspective, allows a greater number of people to have access to a service which, often, in its individual formula, is configured as too expensive to sustain, not only as far as the individual who requires it is concerned, but in particular for interventions organized by institutions (Di Fabio & Maree, 2012). The methodology of the power of the audience used for interventions of career and life construction in groups, enables an increase in self-reflection and in the professional self, enhancing the individual projectuality of each single participant and, at the same time, allowing the realization of interventions which are cheaper than one-on-one counseling interventions, thus favouring access to the service to a larger number of participants (Di Fabio & Maree, 2012).
Career services for employability
Career services are facing great changes that have an impact on the labour market. To quote one of the most important, technological innovations are determining the rapid obsolescence of many professional figures and the emergence of new professionalisms and skills required by the market (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2015). Furthermore, those who finish university studies have to face an increasingly global labour market, where there is intense competition for access to the most qualified positions[1].
Universities are called upon to design and organize career services that are capable of putting students and graduates in touch with opportunities for career development and enabling them to acquire the skills needed to strengthen their employability, in the different dimensions referred to previously.
By virtue of a labour market in constant evolution it is necessary to strengthen counseling functions and especially networking, in order to provide an “ecosystem” which favours the autonomous ability of moving into the labour market and addressing the different transitions that can involve the lives of everyone (between education and work, but also between work and work and within the same company organization).
Recent international experiences of career services underline the need to establish connections to promote shared responsibility in employability (NACE, 2014). The connection and the constant relationship with a number of subjects internal and external to the university (companies, departments, ex alumni, employers’ associations, business incubators, etc.) and the provision of information and contacts put students in a position to acquire the skills and appropriate tools that will help them in building their professional project.
The connections between internal and external subjects to the university help to promote a series of services, ranging from vocational guidance on the recognition of the needs of enterprises, mentoring, curricular and extracurricular internships, to the development of paths of alternation between education and work, where it is possible to experience innovative teaching modalities.
Employability can be considered as the stakes that services have to face, in a labour market where more than looking for a (any) job we need to acquire the necessary skills to be able to independently “navigate” through transitions, changes and difficulties that may be encountered.
One final consideration - the role that career services and in general employment services play, can be placed within a change of paradigm in the right to work: from the right to have work (work as a social right) to the right to get a job and maintain it once obtained (Marshall, 2012), in the framework of a social system that promotes free economic enterprise (work as the right to freedom) and in which the traditional role of the welfare state is resized (Cavallaro, 2012; Mazzetti, 2014). A corollary of this second type of right to work, incidentally, is the right to have effective counseling services (Di Fabio & Cumbo, 2016).
Therefore, in view of a right to work as a right to freedom to choose one’s own career path, career services and employment services have to concentrate on supporting the development of the real power of choice, following the previously examined principles of accountability.
In the previous pages, the multidimensionality of employability has been emphasized as the ability to hold together different levels of subjective experience in a balance which can help people to “govern” their navigation through phases of transition, in a context marked by growing uncertainty about the future.
We must bear in mind the importance and the difficulty of the task with which services are confronted today (hence the need to work with the quality of operators): opportunities can suddenly turn into risks of failure, and specialized competences matured can prove insufficient for the construction of a lasting professional project if they are not consistent with one’s existential project and with one’s overall sense of life. One is reminded of the hero of Houellebecq’s (2015) debut novel, a thirty-year-old computer programmer who is finally lost after a painful and inconclusive professional and existential path:
“Everything that could have been a source of participation, enjoyment and innocent sensory harmony, has become a source of suffering and misfortune. (...) For years I have been walking next to a ghost that looks like me, and who lives in a theoretical paradise, in close relationship with the world. For a long time I believed I could have reached him. But enough is enough.
(…) I’m in the middle of the abyss. My skin feels like a frontier, and the outside world is crushing me. The impression of breaking up is total (…)
The sublime fusion will not happen; the purpose of my life has been missed. It's two o'clock in the afternoon”.
References
Arnold, J. (1997). Managing careers into the 21st century. London, UK: Paul Chapman.
Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A new perspective for organizational inquiry. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 295-306.
Arthur, M. B., Claman, P. H., & DeFillippi, R. J. (1995). Intelligent enterprise, intelligent careers. Academy of Management Executive, 9(4), 7-20.
Arthur, M. B., Hall, D. T., & Lawrence, B. S. (Eds.). (1989). Handbook of career theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. New York: Oxford University Press.
Baruch, Y. (2004). Transforming careers: From linear to multidirectional career paths: organizational and individual perspectives. Career Development International, 9(1), 58-73.
Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Bernaud, J.-L., Lhotellier, L., Sovet, L., Arnoux-Nicolas, C., & Pelayo, F. (2016). Psicologia dell'accompagnamento. Il senso della vita e del lavoro nell’orientamento professionale. (versione italiana a cura di A. Di Fabio). Trento, Italia: Erickson.
Berntson, E., & Marklund, S. (2007). The relationship between perceived employability and subsequent health. Work & Stress, 21(3), 279-292.
Berntson, E., Sverke, M., & Marklund, S. (2006). Predicting perceived employability: human capital or labour market opportunities? Economic and Industrial Democracy, 27(2), 223-244.
Bezuidenhout, M., & Coetzee, M. (2010). Preliminary exploratory factor analysis: Student employability scale. Unpublished research report, Department of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
Bimrose, J., Barnes, S.-A., & Hughes, D. (2008). Adult career progression and advancement: A five year study of the effectiveness of guidance. Coventry, UK: Warwick Institute for Employment Research and the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.
Blustein, D. L. (2006). The psychology of working: A new perspective for career development, counseling and public policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
Blustein, D. L. (2011). A relational theory of working. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(1), 1-17.
Briscoe, J. P., Hall, D. T., & DeMuth, R. L. F. (2006). Protean and boundaryless careers: An empirical exploration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 30-47.
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2015). La nuova rivoluzione delle macchine. Lavoro e prosperità nell’era della tecnologia trionfante. Milano, Italia: Feltrinelli.
Byron, W. (1995). Coming to terms with the new corporate contract. Business Horizons, January-February, 8-15.
Cavallaro, L. (2012). A cosa serve l’articolo 18. Roma, Italia: Manifesto Libri.
Cawsey, T., Deszca, G., & Mazerolle, M. (1995). The portfolio career as a response to a changing job market. Journal of Career Planning and Employment, 56(1), 41-47.
Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparisons on self-evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 51-69.
Coetzee, M. (2008). Psychological career resources of working adults: A South African survey. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 34(2), 32-41.
Coetzee, M. (2010). Exploratory factor analyses of the Graduateness Scale and the Employability Attributes Scale. Unpublished research report, Department of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
Côté, J. (1996). Sociological perspectives on identity formation: The culture-identity link and identity capital. Journal of Adolescence, 19, 417-428.
Dacre Pool, L., & Qualter, P. (2013). Emotional self-efficacy, graduate employability, and career satisfaction: Testing the associations. Australian Journal of Psychology, 65(4), 214-223.
Dacre Pool, L., & Sewell, P. (2007). The key to employability: Developing a practical model of graduate employability. Education + Training, 49(4), 277-289.
De Cuyper, N. D., Bernhard-Oettel, C., Berntson, E., Witte, H. D., & Alarco, B. (2008). Employability and employees’ well-being: Mediation by job insecurity. Applied Psychology, 57(3), 488-509.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2011). The management paradox: Self-rated employability and organizational commitment and performance. Personnel Review, 40(2), 152-172.
De Cuyper, N., Notelaers, G., & De Witte, H. (2009). Job insecurity and employability in fixed-term contractors, agency workers, and permanent workers: Associations with job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14(2), 193-205.
DeFillippi, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A competency‐based perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(4), 307-324.
DeFillippi, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1996). Boundaryless contexts and careers: A competency-based perspective. In M. B. Arthur & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era (pp. 116-131). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Di Fabio, A. (2012, July). Narratabililty and career construction: Empirical evidence of intervention effectiveness. State-of-the-Science Invited Lecture in the field of Psychology of Counseling presented at the International Congress of Psychology (ICP) 2012, Cape Town, South Africa.
Di Fabio, A. (2013a). Applying career construction in group-based contexts with adults. In A. Di Fabio & J. G. Maree (Eds.), Psychology of career counseling: New challenges for a new era. Festschrift in honour of Prof. Mark Savickas (pp. 83-99). New York, NY: Nova Science.
Di Fabio, A. (2013b, November). Invited paper al workshop tematico “Linee guida per le politiche di orientamento” al Forum Internazionale per l’Orientamento 2017 “Orientare al futuro: i giovani e i percorsi di occupabilità”, Genova, Italia.
Di Fabio, A. (2014a). Career counseling and positive psychology in the 21st century: New constructs and measures for evaluating the effectiveness of intervention. Journal of Counsellogy, 1, 193-213.
Di Fabio, A. (2014b). “Constructing my Future Purposeful Life”: A new Life Construction intervention. In A. Di Fabio & J.-L. Bernaud (Eds.), The Construction of the Identity in 21st Century: A Festschrift for Jean Guichard (pp. 219-239). New York: Nova Science.
Di Fabio, A. (2014c). The new purposeful identitarian awareness for the twenty-first century: Valorize themselves in the Life Construction from youth to adulthood and late adulthood. In A. Di Fabio & J.-L. Bernaud (Eds.), The Construction of the Identity in 21st Century: A Festschrift for Jean Guichard (pp. 157-168). New York: Nova Science.
Di Fabio, A. (in press). A meta-review of empirical studies dealing with employability and measures of employability. In J. G. Maree (Ed.), Psychology of career adaptability, employability, and resilience. New York, NY: Springer.
Di Fabio, A., Bernaud, J. -L., & Kenny, M. E. (2013). Perceived career counselor relational and technical behaviors and outcomes among Italian university students. Journal of Career Assessment, 21, 190-199.
Di Fabio, A., & Bucci, O. (2013). Tratti di personalità o intelligenza emotiva per l’occupabilità di studenti universitari? Counseling. Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 6, 195-204.
Di Fabio, A., & Bucci, O. (2015). Self-Perceived Employability Scale for students: Contributo alla validazione italiana con studenti di scuola secondaria di secondo grado. Counseling. Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 8(2).
Di Fabio, A., & Bucci, O. (2017). Dispositional Measure of Employability: Valutazione delle proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana. Counseling. Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 10(1).
Di Fabio, A., & Cumbo, T. (2016). Mutamenti del mercato del lavoro, modelli di orientamento e ruolo dei career service Counseling. Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 9(3).
Di Fabio, A., & Kenny, M. E. (2015). The contributions of emotional intelligence and social support for adaptive career progress among Italian youth. Journal of Career Development, 42(1), 48-49.
Di Fabio, A., & Maree, J. G. (2012). Group-based Life Design Counseling in an Italian context. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 100-107.
Di Fabio, A., & Maree, J. G. (Eds.). (2013). Psychology of Career Counseling: New challenges for a new era. Festschrift in honour of Prof. Mark Savickas. New York: Nova Science.
Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (2013). Self-perceived Employability for students: Un primo contributo alla validazione italiana. Counseling. Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 6, 97-105.
Duarte, M. E. (2004). O indivíduo e a organização: Perspectivas de desenvolvimento. [The individual and the organization: Perspectives of development]. Psychologica (Extra-Série), 549-557.
Guichard, J. (2013, November). Career guidance, education, and dialogues for a fair and sustainable human development. Inaugural conference of the UNESCO chair of Lifelong guidance and counselling, University of Wroclaw, Poland.
Fraccaroli, F. (2005). Progettare la carriera. Milano, Italia: Raffaello Cortina.
Fugate, M., & Kinicki. A. J. (2008). A dispositional approach to employability: Development of a measure and test of implications for employee reactions to organizational change. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 503-527.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Employability: A psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 14-38.
Guichard, J. (2007). L’impact de la mondialisation sur le conseil en orientation des adultes. Risorsa Uomo, 13(3), 423-442.
Guichard, J. (2013, November). Career guidance, education, and dialogues for a fair and sustainable human development. Inaugural conference of the UNESCO chair of Lifelong guidance and counselling, University of Wroclaw, Poland.
Hall, D. T., Briscoe, J. P., & Kram, K. E. (1997). Identity, values and learning in the protean career. In C. L. Cooper & S. E. Jackson (Eds.), Creating tomorrow’s organizations (pp. 321-335). London, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Hartung, P. J. (2010a). Career assessment: Using scores and stories in life designing. In J. K. Maree (Ed.), Career counselling: Techniques that work (pp. 1-10). Cape Town, South Africa: Juta & Company, Ltd.
Hartung, P. J. (2010b). Identifying life-career themes with the career story interview. In J. K. Maree (Ed.), Career counselling: Techniques that work (pp. 161-166). Cape Town, South Africa: Juta & Company, Ltd.
Hillage, J., & Pollard, E. (1998). Employability: Developing a framework for policy analysis. London, UK: DfEE.
Houellebecq, M. (2015). Estensione del dominio della lotta. Milano, Italia: Bompiani.
Humphrey, M. T. (2002). Cittadinanza e classe sociale. Bari, Italia: Laterza.
Kirschenbaum, A., & Mano-Negrin, R. (1999). Underlying labor market dimensions of “opportunities”: The case of employee turnover. Human Relations, 52(10), 1233-1255.
Lane D., Puri A., Cleverly P., & Rajan A. (2000). Employability: Bridging the gap between rhetoric and reality: second report: employer’s perspective. London, OK: Centre for Research in Employment and Technology in Europe.
Lu, C. Q., Sun, J. W., & Du, D. Y. (2016). The relationships between employability, emotional exhaustion, and turnover intention the moderation of perceived career opportunity. Journal of Career Development, 43(1), 37-51.
Mainiero, L. A., & Sullivan, S. E. (2005). Kaleidoscope careers: An alternate explanation for the “opt-out “revolution. The Academy of Management Executive, 19(1), 106-123.
Maree, J. G. (Ed.). (2012). Complete your thesis or dissertation successfully: Practical guidelines. Cape Town: Juta.
Maree, J. G., & Di Fabio, A. (Eds.). (2015). New horizons in career counselling: Converting challenges into opportunities. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Martin, P. (2015). Il sorpasso. Retrieved from http://www.lavoce.info/archives/36477/il-sorpasso/
Mazzetti, G. (2014). Diritto al lavoro. Beffa o sfida? Roma, Italia: Manifesto Libri.
McMahon, M., & Patton, W. (2002). Using qualitative assessment in career counseling. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 2, 51-66.
McQuaid, R. W. (2006). Job search success and employability in local labor markets. The Annals of Regional Science, 40(2), 407-421.
Murphy, K. A., Blustein, D. L., Bohlig, A. J., & Platt, M. G. (2010). The college‐to‐career transition: An exploration of emerging adulthood. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88(2), 174-181.
NACE (2014). Stanford moving to career connections model of career service, spotlight for career service professional. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/s01222014/career-service-office-model.aspx.
Osipow, S. H. (1999). Assessing career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 147-154.
Peiperl, M., & Baruch, Y. (1997). Back to square zero: The post-corporate career. Organizational Dynamics, 25(4), 7-22.
Rajan, A. (1997). Employability in the finance sector: Rhetoric vs reality. Human Resource Management Journal, 7(1), 67-78.
Rehfuss, M. C. (2009). The Future Career Autobiography: A narrative measure of career intervention effectiveness. The Career Development Quarterly, 58(1), 82-90.
Rehfuss, M., & Di Fabio, A. (2012). Validating the Future Career Autobiography as a measure of narrative change. Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 452-462.
Rothwell, A., & Arnold, J. (2007). Self-perceived employability: Development and validation of a scale. Personnel Review, 36(1), 23-41.
Rothwell, A., Herbert, I., & Rothwell, F. (2007). Self-perceived employability: Construction and initial validation of a scale for university students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 1-12.
Savickas, M. L. (2005). The theory and practice of career construction. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 42-70). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Savickas, M. L. (2011). Career counseling. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Savickas, M. L. (2013, September). Life Designing. What is it? Invited Keynote at IAEVG International Conference, Montpellier, France.
Super, D. E. (1957). The psychology of career. Harper: New York.
Super, D. (1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16, 282-298.
Templer, A. J., & Cawsey, T. F. (1999). Rethinking career development in an era of portfolio careers. Career Development International, 4(2), 70-76.
Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 320-333.
Van Dam, K. (2004). Antecedents and consequences of employability orientation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(1), 29-51.
Van Der Heijden, B., Boon, J., Van der Klink, M., & Meijs, E. (2009). Employability enhancement through formal and informal learning: an empirical study among Dutch non-academic university staff members. International journal of training and development, 13(1), 19-37.
van der Klink, J. J., Bultmann, U., Brouwer, S., Burdorf, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Zijlstra, F. R., & van der Wilt, G. J. (2011). Sustainable employability in older workers, work as value. Gedrag & Organisatie, 24(4), 342-356.
Waterman, R., Waterman, J., & Collard, B. (1994). Toward a career resilient workforce. Harvard Business Review, 1, 87-95.
Watts, A. G. (1999). Reshaping career development for the 21st century. CeGS Occasional Paper, Centre for Guidance Studies, University of Derby.
Wille, B., De Fruyt, F., & Feys, M. (2013). Big five traits and intrinsic success in the new career era: A 15-Year longitudinal study on employability and Work-Family conflict. Applied Psychology, 62(1), 124-156.
Whiston, S. C. (1996). Accountability through action research: Research methods for practitioners. Journal of Counseling & Development, 74, 616-623.
Whiston, S. C. (2001). Selecting career outcome assessments: An organizational scheme. Journal of Career Assessment, 9(3), 215-228.
Whiston, S. C., Sexton, T. L., & Lasoff, D. L. (1998). Career-intervention outcome: A replication and extension of Oliver and Spokane (1988). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 150-165.
Wittekind, A., Raeder, S., & Grote, G. (2010). A longitudinal study of determinants of perceived employability. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 566-586.
Note
[1]According to OECD forecasts, in 2030 China and India “will produce” more than 60 percent of all graduates in Stem subjects (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) in the OECD and G20 countries (Martin, 2015).
Autore per la corrispondenza
A. Di Fabio Fax +39 055 2756134. Tel. +39 055 2755013
Indirizzo e-mail: adifabio@psico.unifi.it
Dipartimento di Scienze della Formazione e Psicologia (Sezione di Psicologia), Università degli Studi di Firenze, via di San Salvi 12 – Complesso di San Salvi, Padiglione 26, 50135, Firenze, Italia.
Note
1 A
© 2016 Edizioni Centro Studi Erickson S.p.A.
Tutti i diritti riservati. Vietata la riproduzione con qualsiasi mezzo effettuata, se non previa autorizzazione dell'Editore.
