Career Decision-Making Difficulties: Assessment and Treatment Itamar Gati Hebrew University of Jerusalem Today’s Presentation Presenting a model and means for locating career decision-making difficulties of individuals Presenting possible treatment of the difficulties 2 Parsons (1908) Zytowski (2008) 3 Indeed, it is difficult to make career decisions: Quantity of Information: often large N of alternatives and factors, within-occupation variance information is practically unlimited Quality of Information: soft, subjective, fuzzy, inaccurate, biased Uncertainty about: Non-Cognitive Factors: the individual’s future preferences, future career options, unpredictable changes and opportunities, the probability of implementing choice emotional and personality-related factors, the necessity for compromise, actual or perceived social barriers and biases Lack of knowledge about the process is among the prevalent difficulties 4 CDM Difficulties of 15,000 surfers on the Future Directions website (Gati & Meyers, 2003) Are you experiencing difficulties in making your career decision? 60% 40% 20% 0% yes somewhat no 5 Assessing clients’ needs involves Locating the focuses of the client’s career decision-making difficulties Appraising the degree to which the client’s preferences are crystallized Assessing the client’s decision-making status Acknowledging the client’s career decisionmaking profile (pattern, style): Interventions aimed at facilitating career decision making should be tailored to the client’s career decision-making profile (pattern, style) 6 Career Decision-Making Difficulties The first step in helping individuals is to locate the focuses of the difficulties they face in making career decisions Gati, Krausz, and Osipow (1996) proposed a taxonomy for describing the difficulties (see next slide), based on: the stage in the decision-making process during which the difficulties typically arise the similarity between the sources of the difficulties the effects that the difficulties may have on the process and the relevant type of intervention 7 Locating the Focuses of Career DecisionMaking Difficulties (Gati, Krausz, & Osipow, 1996) During the Process Prior to Engaging in the Process Lack of Readiness due to Lack of Indecimotivation siveness Lack of Information about Dysfunc- Cdm Self Occupations tional process beliefs Ways of obtaining info. Inconsistent Information due to Unreliable Internal Info. conflicts External conflicts 8 Empirical Structure of CDM Difficulties (N = 10,000) Lack of motivation General indecisiveness Dysfunctional beliefs Lack of info. about self Lack of info about process LoI about occupations LoI about addition sources of help Unreliable Information Internal conflicts External conflicts 9 Difficulties Arising prior to Beginning Process Lack of Readiness Lack of motivation – a lack of willingness to make a decision at a certain point in time General Indecisiveness (negative perceptions of self, anxiety related to the decision-making process, diffused self-concept and identity) Dysfunctional Beliefs – a distorted perception of the career decision-making process, irrational expectations, dysfunctional thoughts 10 Difficulties Arising during the Process Lack of Information About the Decision Making Process how to make a decision wisely and the specific steps involved in the process About the Self (preferences, abilities) About Occupations (alternatives, their characteristics) About Ways of Obtaining Information 11 Difficulties Arising during the Process Inconsistent Information Unreliable Information – stems from contradictory information about the individual or about considered occupations Internal Conflicts – among alternatives, among factors considered, between an alternative and a preferred characteristics, difficulty in compromising External Conflicts –between the individual’s preferences and the preferences voiced by significant others 12 The Career Decision-Making Difficulties Questionnaire (CDDQ) The CDDQ was developed - to test this taxonomy and - to serve as a means for assessing individuals’ career decision-making difficulties Cronbach Alpha internal consistency estimate: .93-.95 for the total CDDQ score 13 www.cddq.org 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 The Four Stages of Interpretation 1. Ascertaining Credibility, using validity items and the time required to fill out the questionnaire 2. Estimating Differentiation based on the standard deviation of the 10 difficulty-scale scores 3. Locating the salient, moderate, or negligible difficulties, based on the individual's absolute and relative scale scores 4. Determining the confidence in the feedback and the need to add reservations to it (based on doubtful credibility, partial differentiation, or low informativeness) 22 Distribution of types of feedback in the four groups 100% 90% 80% feedback add reservation 70% 60% 50% no feedback 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% P&P Internet Hebrew P&P Internet English 23 Among the salient difficulties is “lack of information about the career decision-making process” The Distribution of the Three Levels of Difficulties (negligible, moderate, salient difficulty) in the Ten Difficulty Categories and the Four Groups (N = 6192; H-Hebrew, E-English, p-paper and pencil, I-Internet) salient difficulty moderate difficulty no difficulty 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E H H E E 0% p I p I p Ip I p I p I p Ip I p I p I p I p I p Ip I p I p I p Ip I p I p I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 24 Research Findings Osipow and Gati (1998) - American students (n=403) The correlation between the CDDQ and the CDS was = .77 The correlation between the CDDQ and the CDMSE was negative, as expected, r = -.50 The total CDDQ scores of students who had not yet made a decision were noticeably higher than the scores of students who had already made a decision. 25 Gati, Osipow, Krausz, and Saka (1998) 95 pairs of counselors - counselees The median correlation between the counselor’s judgments and the counselee’s self-reports in the 10 difficulty categories of the CDDQ was .49 (range .27 -- .67). The lowest agreement was in the difficulty categories involving a lack of information 26 Lancaster, Rudolf, Perkins, and Paten (1999) The correlation between the total CDDQ score and the CDS was = .82 27 A Cross-Cultural Perspective Good fit of the empirical data to the theoretical structure was found across cultures The structure of difficulties is similar as well across cultures Much variance is found among individuals in each group; only a little variance in career decision-making difficulties is attributable to cultural differences 28 CDDQ’s 3 Major Clusters by Area 9 Readiness Lack of Information Inconsistent Information 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 North America Israel Middle East Australia Far East 29 Differences in the CDDQ Means between Canadian and Israeli Career Counselees (r =.98) Israeli counselees Canadian counselees 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 30 The CDDQ can be used for: Initial screening of clients (e.g., in terms of the 3 major categories or the 10 difficulty categories) and directing them to various interventions (face-to-face, Internet-based guidance systems) Locating the focuses of clients’ career decision-making difficulties (“needs assessment”) Evaluating the effectiveness of career interventions (e.g., before/ after) 31 La ck of Mo Ge ne tiv ati ral on Ind ec isiv Dy sfu en es Lo nc s t io Ia na bo lB ut e li the e fs CD M Pr oc Lo es Ia s bo Lo ut Ia the bo Se ut lf O Lo cc up Ia bo ati on ut s Ad d i t io Un na rel l In iab fo le Inf orm ati Int on ern al Co nfl Ex ic t ter s na lC on f lic ts Level of difficulty Client A (#193) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Scale 32 bo u tO na ts on f lic on f lic ts al C rna lC fo s n l In rm at i o it io tio n elf es s ef s t th eS Inf o Ex ter n Int e le eli oc Pr n ne ss va t io cc up a dd tA iab bo u Un rel Lo Ia bo u bo u DM Lo Ia ive oti na lB ec is nc t io Ind t th eC Lo Ia Lo Ia era l Dy sfu Ge n La ck of M Level of difficulty Client B (#615) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Scale 33 Locating the Focuses of Clients’ Career Decision-Making Difficulties Client B (#615) is an 18-year-old Caucasian woman who is a business school freshman. Her CDDQ results showed the following salience: general indecisiveness, ways of obtaining information. dysfunctional beliefs, lack of information about the CDM process, the self and occupations, unreliable information, internal conflicts lack of motivation, external conflicts, (Gati & Amir, 2010) 34 Testing the effectiveness of intervention: MBCD’s Effect (Cohen’s d) on Reducing Career Decision-Making Difficulties (Gati, Saka, & Krausz, 2003) 0.8 0.72 0.65 d 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.31 0.3 0.2 0.11 0.1 0 Lack of Readiness Lack of Information Inconsistent Information Total CDDQ 35 Implications for counseling Interpretive feedback provides an initial diagnosis of the client’s difficulties and needs and facilitates focusing on those that most deserve attention and intervention. Filling out the CDDQ again after a while can be used to test the effectiveness of the intervention. It is crucial for Internet-based assessment of career decision-making difficulties, where no expert counselor is available. 36 Designing Interventions Based on the Taxonomy: An example Tina Sirois-LeBlanc & Jeffrey Landine, University of New Brunswick, Counselling Services http://www.natcon.org/natcon/papers/natcon_papers_2005_ e12.pdf From the Conclusions: “This paper outlined the process taken by UNB Counselling Services in changing its existing career counselling model… to an enhanced developmental model, which included a screening career assessment (CDDQ), the initial interview, and additional services offered through workshops. The workshops were developed based on the theoretical framework of the CDDQ, which takes into account key developmental tasks in career decisionmaking. Students are referred to relevant workshops according to their reported career difficulties identified by the CDDQ…” 37 Assessment of Career DecisionMaking Difficulties involves: Measuring the difficulties computing the 10 difficulty scale scores computing the 3 major cluster scores computing the total CDDQ score Interpreting the Client’s difficulty profile salient locating , moderate, or negligible difficulties evaluate confidence of interpretation 38 The Next Step: Treating the Difficulties Difficulties differ in: their sources (cognitive, emotional) severity Implications (length of intervention, prevents making decisions or leads to a non-optimal one) Based on these order of treatment 39 Severity Ratings and Recommended Treatment Sequence, (N = 28 Expert Counselors) Mean Severity Ratings Mean Treatment Sequence Lack of Readiness lack of motivation indecisiveness dysfunctional beliefs 7.50 7.43 7.21 3.44 4.93 4.18 Lack of Information about the process about the self about occupations about add sources 4.36 6.32 4.43 3.79 4.61 3.61 6.82 8.14 Inconsistent Information unreliable inf. internal conflicts external conflicts 5.30 7.61 6.86 7.39 4.89 6.26 Difficulty 40 Suggestions for Treating the Ten Types of Difficulties 41 The four steps in dealing with the difficulties Verify its existence Identify its sources Plan an intervention Treat it !! 42 Lack of Readiness: Lack of Motivation Primary assessment – temporary or chronicavoidant? Locate the source (locus of control, uncertainty, lack of career decision-making self-efficacy) Discuss the costs and benefits of postponing the decision inform client that not making a decision is also a (sometimes legitimate) decision present the importance of going through a systematic process and illustrating the different implications of making or not making a decision 43 Lack of Readiness: General Indecisiveness Determine sources (negative perceptions of self, anxiety, diffused self-concept and identity) Possible treatment: Discuss previous experience in decision making Reinforce previous good decisions Identify factors involved in indecisiveness and treat them separately 44 Lack of Readiness: Dysfunctional Beliefs Identify, understand and change dysfunctional beliefs into functional ones by using CDDQ, CTI and CBI Discuss the fact that the decision needs to be based on known facts and specifically: The resilience of the world of work The importance of choosing out of genuine interest The collection of more information about relevant occupations 45 Lack of Information about the Process Present the PIC Model: – sequential elimination, relevant aspects and considerations, use CACGS In-depth exploration – information sources for each stage, distinguish between structured and “soft” information, computer-assisted systems Choosing – Assess whether various choices can be actualized, rank options and choose Prescreening 46 Lack of Information about the Process (cont.) Awareness to The various aspects or factors that need to be considered The role of career counselors Acknowledging The uncertainty involved in the decision The need / the role of compromise 47 Lack of Information about the Self Clarify client’s preferences (importance of specific aspects, optimal level and compromise levels) And client’s abilities (general cognitive and specific abilities) Discuss with the client's his or hers past experience and achievements 48 Lack of Information about Careers What are the options (educational, occupations, jobs) What characterize them (and what distinguish among them) What are the relations among education, training, occupations, and jobs 49 Lack of Information about the Additional Sources for Help Inform client about additional sources of help about: career decision making process, self (preferences, abilities, personality) career alternatives 50 Using the Information: Unreliable Information Explore whether unreliable information is about: self (preferences or abilities) or career locate specific contradictions in information Treating contradictions about self: help client discover client’s skills, interests and important considerations and successful past experiences Treating contradictions about alternatives: guide to relevant and reliable information sources 51 Using the Information: Internal Conflicts Assess whether the conflict is about preferences or actualization problems Discuss the need to compromise and recommend framing preferences in terms of aspects rather than alternatives If the conflict is about problems of actualization discuss options, assess the probability and costs of actualizing the plans, help to assess the cost of compromise, and construct an alternative plan. Help the client decide what to choose as an occupation and what as leisure activity 52 Using the Information: External Conflicts Identify clients’ significant others and discuss different factors for their importance (client, relationship, decision, social context and culture-related) Suggest to reconsider importance of others, rephrase conflicts in terms of aspects or factors considered rather than alternatives (e.g., medicine vs. law helping people vs. money) 53 To sum up Career choices are based on decision-making processes, therefore career counseling is also decision counseling Locating individual’s career decision-making difficulties is a core component of the assessment of their needs; it shapes the counseling process Measuring career making-decision difficulties is not enough – it is important to interpret them 54 For further information: www.cddq.org itamar.gati@huji.ac.il 55